Download - NRMRL QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 1 of 45
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division (APPCD) Emissions Characterization and Prevention Branch (ECPB)
Uinta Basin Well Pad Pneumatic Controller Emissions Research Study
QA Category: B / Measurement
Extramural Research
QAPP-1J16-019.R1
Revision Number: 1 December 9, 2016
Prepared by Jacobs Technology Inc.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Contract EP-C-15-008
WA 1-037
NRMRL QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 2 of 45
Approvals
QA Project Plan Title: Uinta Basin Well Pad Pneumatic Controller Emissions Research Study
NRMRL QA Tracking ID: QLOG No. G-APPCD-0030050, QTRAK No. 16006
If Intramural or Extramural, EPA NRMRL Project Approvals
Name: Technical Lead Person (TLP) Eben Thoma
Signature/Date:
Name: TLP’s Supervisor Richard Shores, Branch Chief
Signature/Date:
Name: QA Manager Libby Nessley
Signature/Date:
Name: EPA R8 Lead Michael Stovern
Signature/Date:
Name: Other EPA Signature/Date:
If Extramural, Contractor Approvals
Name: Contractor Manager/Lead Parikshit J. Deshmukh, WAL
Signature/Date:
Name: Contractor QA: Zora Drake-Richman, QAO
Signature/Date:
Name: Other Contractors: Chris Winterrowd, Department Manager
Signature/Date:
Name: Other Contractors:
Signature/Date:
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 3 of 45
Change History
Change No.
Description Date
Submitted
Date Approved
Revised
Section Changes
0 Initial QAPP 8/23/16 9/2/16
R1 Revision 1 12/9/16 Entire
document
Response to minor comments; adding field forms; minor programmatic and technical adjustments
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 4 of 45
Table of Contents
Approvals ................................................................................................................................... 2
Figures ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Tables ......................................................................................................................................... 5
List of Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 6
Distribution List .......................................................................................................................... 7
Disclaimer and Acknowledgments .............................................................................................. 7
Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 8
1.0 Project Description and Objectives .................................................................................. 10
1.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 10
1.2 Description and Purpose of This QAPP .............................................................. 12
1.3 Project Objectives .............................................................................................. 13
2.0 Project Organization and Responsibilities ....................................................................... 14
2.1 Project Personnel ............................................................................................... 14
2.2 Project Schedule ................................................................................................ 15
3.0 Scientific Approach......................................................................................................... 16
3.1 Uinta Basin ONG Operators and Site Selection .................................................. 16
3.2 Understanding Emissions from PC Systems ....................................................... 18
3.3 Scientific Approach Overview ........................................................................... 18
3.4 Example Field Measurement Sequence .............................................................. 20
4.0 Information, Measurement, and Analysis Procedures ...................................................... 26
4.1 Information-Gathering and Measurement Systems ............................................. 26
4.1.1 PC, Process, Application, and Classification Information ....................... 27
4.1.2 Optical Gas Imaging and Hand-Held Leak Detection Probes .................. 28
4.1.3 PC Actuation Counters ........................................................................... 29
4.1.4 PC Emissions Measurements by Flow Meters ......................................... 30
4.1.5 PC Emissions Measurements by Augmented BHFS ................................ 31
4.1.6 Evacuated Canister Acquisition and Analysis ......................................... 32
4.1.7 Temperature and Pressure Measurement ................................................. 35
4.2 On-Site Procedures ............................................................................................ 35
4.3 Critical Measurements ....................................................................................... 35
5.0 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ........................................................................... 36
5.1 Data Quality Indicator Goals .............................................................................. 36
5.1.1 Accuracy ................................................................................................ 38
5.1.2 Precision................................................................................................. 38
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 5 of 45
5.2 Assessment of DQI Goals .................................................................................. 38
5.2.1 Flow Meter Assessment .......................................................................... 39
5.2.2 Bacharach Hi Flow Sampler and QA Measuring Instrument Assessment 40
5.2.3 Optical Gas Imaging (OGI) Camera Assessment .................................... 41
5.2.4 PC Actuation Counter Assessment.......................................................... 41
6.0 Data Reporting and Validation ........................................................................................ 42
6.1 Reporting Requirements ..................................................................................... 42
6.2 Data-Related Deliverables .................................................................................. 42
6.3 Data Reduction Deliverables .............................................................................. 43
6.4 Data Validation Deliverables.............................................................................. 43
6.5 Data Storage Requirements ................................................................................ 43
7.0 References ...................................................................................................................... 44
Figures
Figure 2-1. Organizational chart ................................................................................................ 15
Figure 3-1. Locations of ONG sites and operators in the study region ....................................... 17
Figure 3-2. Examples of well pad PCs: (a) separator PC and (b) thermostat PC on tank ........... 18
Figure 4-1. FLIR GF320 OGI camera........................................................................................ 28
Figure 4-2. Model SERN-5 pneumatic counter (not fully installed) ........................................... 29
Figure 4-3. Fox Thermal flow meter FT3 (left) and Alicat flow meter (right) ............................ 31
Figure 4-4. Bacharach Hi Flow sampler (BHFS) with some attachments ................................... 32
Figure 4-5. TVA-1000B (left), PPM Gas Surveyor 500 (middle), and Gas Rover (right) ........... 32
Figure 5-1. Mensor APC-600 with actuation counter attached. .................................................. 38
Tables
Table 4-1. Information-Gathering and Measurement Systems ................................................... 26
Table 4-2. Equipment Used for PC Emissions Flow Meter Measurements ................................. 30
Table 4-3. List of PAMS Target VOCs...................................................................................... 33
Table 4-4. Critical Measurements .............................................................................................. 35
Table 5-1. DQI Goals for the Project ......................................................................................... 36
Table 5-2. Procedures Used to Assess QA Objectives ............................................................... 39
Table 5-3. Sample BHFS Calibration Check Test ...................................................................... 40
Table 6-1. Data-Related Deliverables ........................................................................................ 42
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 6 of 45
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Pneumatic Controller and Site Information-Gathering Procedures
Appendix B: Optical Gas Imaging Procedures
Appendix C: PC Actuation Counting Procedures Using the SERN-5
Appendix D: Operating Procedures for Flow Meter Measurements
Appendix E: Operating Procedure for Augmented Bacharach Hi Flow Sampler Measurements
Appendix F: Evacuated Canister Analysis Procedures
Fa: GC/FID Analysis of Hydrocarbons Using Method TO-14A
Fb: EPA Method 18 Bag and EPA ALT-100 Canister Analysis
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 7 of 45
Distribution List
Copies of this plan and all revisions will be sent initially to the following individuals. It is the
responsibility of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency work assignment contracting officer’s
representative (WACOR) and the Jacobs Technology Inc. (Jacobs) work assignment leader (WAL)
to make copies of the plan available to all project personnel.
EPA
Eben Thoma, ORD/NRMRL/APPCD WACOR and Technical Lead
Richard Shores, ORD/NRMRL/APPCD Branch Chief
Libby Nessley, ORD/NRMRL/APPCD QA Manager
Michael Stovern, EPA Region 8 Technical Lead
Jacobs Technology Inc.
Parik Deshmukh, Work Assignment Leader
Chris Winterrowd, Department Manager
Zora Drake-Richman, Quality Assurance Officer
Stacy Henkle, Technical Editor
Disclaimer and Acknowledgments
Any mention of trade names, products, or services does not imply an endorsement by the U.S.
Government or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA does not endorse any
commercial products, services, or enterprises. Draft versions of portions of this document were
prepared by EPA and provided to Jacobs Technology Inc. for use in preparation of this quality
assurance project plan. We would like to thank the technical reviewers from the American
Petroleum Institute for helpful suggestions and information on pneumatic controller types and
assessment approaches.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 8 of 45
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACE Air Climate and Energy Program
AF activity factor
API American Petroleum Institute
APPCD Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
BHFS Bacharach Hi Flow® sampler
BLM Bureau of Land Management
CH4 methane
cfm cubic feet per minute
COC chain of custody
DP-IR Detecto Pak-Infrared
DQI data quality indicator
EF emission factor
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FID flame ionization detector
GC gas chromatography
h hour(s)
HASP health and safety plan
HC hydrocarbon
HHP hand-held probe
Hz hertz (rate of once per second)
in. Hg inch(es) of mercury
IR infrared
Jacobs Jacobs Technology Inc.
lpm liter(s) per minute
MET metrology
MFC mass flow controller
min minute(s)
NG natural gas
NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
OGI optical gas imaging
ONG oil and natural gas
OIPA Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association
OR operator representative
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 9 of 45
ORD Office of Research and Development
PAMS photochemical assessment monitoring stations
PC pneumatic controller
ppm part(s) per million
psi pound(s) per square inch
psig pound(s) per square inch gauge
QA quality assurance
QAO quality assurance officer
QAPP quality assurance project plan
QC quality control
R8 EPA Region 8
RARE Regional Applied Research Effort
RLS Research Laboratory Support
scf standard cubic feet
scfm standard cubic feet per minute
slpm standard liter(s) per minute
TFS Tunable Filter Spectroscopy
UDAQ Utah Division of Air Quality
VOC volatile organic compound
WA work assignment
WACOR work assignment contracting officer’s representative
WAL work assignment leader
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 10 of 45
1.0 Project Description and Objectives
1.1 Background
Oil and natural gas (ONG) well pad operations employ natural gas–driven pneumatic
controllers (PCs) for production process control and safety functions. As part of regular operation,
most well pad PCs are designed to emit a small quantity of natural gas to the atmosphere. Because
of the large numbers of PCs in use, emissions associated with this source category contribute
significantly to greenhouse gas and volatile organic compound (VOC) emission inventories for the
ONG sector. To support environmentally responsible development of U.S. energy assets, it is of
ongoing importance to improve information on the number, type, use, operational conditions, and
emission characteristics of well pad PCs, as well as methods to characterize their emissions. This
quality assurance project plan (QAPP) describes a collaborative emission measurement and
method development study, to be conducted in the Uinta Basin, Utah, that seeks to contribute
information on this important source category.
Typically, a well pad PC converts a sensed process variable (e.g., mechanical float level,
temperature, pressure) to a pneumatic valve actuation in order to control a process or execute a
safety function. Well pad PCs come in a variety of designs and are used in many different process
applications. The expected air emission profile of a PC system depends on its operational design
(including the connecting tubing and actuator) and physical dimensions, how it is used in a specific
application, the process characteristics of the well pad, and the maintenance state of the PC system.
Due to varied models and applications and the lack of standardized terminology, the development
of PC system emissions categories is a difficult task. As of August 2016, the American Petroleum
Institute (API) and subcommittee members are working on a PC Technical Standard that will assist
with classification of PCs and determination of emission profiles based on engineering
calculations. This QAPP does not attempt to define a detailed PC system type classification
approach, but the project will acquire information such as PC make, model, retrofit status, and
process information to allow later assignment using the best available reference data and
categorization schemes.
Regarding basic type classification for PCs that are designed to emit natural gas to the
atmosphere, four major categories based on the depressurization method and service type can be
described (Simpson, 2014). The depressurization method of a PC can be either continuous bleed
or intermittent vent. A continuous bleed PC emits supply gas continuously to the atmosphere as
part of its operation. An intermittent vent PC has a physical barrier between the supply gas and the
atmosphere and emits periodically in short bursts, only during valve actuation. There are also two
major service types of regularly emitting PCs. Some well pad processes require valves to be
actuated in an “on/off” fashion, whereas other processes require a “throttling” action where the
value set point varies in response to the control loop signal. The two depressurization methods and
the two service types comprise the four major categories for regularly emitting PCs.
Within these four categories are several PC subtypes (e.g., high bleed or low bleed
continuous, or snap action or proportional action on/off intermittent vent). For properly operating
and maintained simple continuous bleed PC control loops, average emissions are relatively
constant in time, determined primarily by the flow orifice, so a “snapshot” emission measurement
can be representative of long-term emissions. The time-dependent emission rate (or bleed rate) of
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 11 of 45
simple continuous PCs will decrease and increase slightly during actuation and de-actuation of the
control loop, so ideally the measurement time period will span these events.
The emissions profile of intermittent vent PCs, also called intermittent pilots if the PC and
actuator are separated, differ greatly from continuous vent PCs. Intermittent vent PCs primarily
emit natural gas (NG) to the atmosphere when the control loop is actuating/de-actuating. The
actuation results in a discrete emission event of limited temporal profile and therefore knowledge
of both the emissions per actuation and the number of actuations per unit time are required to
determine emissions. Well-maintained intermittent PCs emit a very low continuous “seepage” of
NG to the atmosphere between actuation events. This seepage is expected because it is not possible
to make pilot seals completely tight in real-world conditions. While the designed seepage rate is
not published by all manufacturers and will differ by model and process, it is believed to be
typically less than 0.05 scf/h for most intermittent PC designs.
More complex types of PC control loops are also possible. For example, a proportional-
type continuous PC can be combined with an intermittent pilot, effectively superimposing event-
driven emission on a continuous emission baseline. Control loops can also include add-on “relays”
that execute some process or control function and can serve as additional emissions points for the
PC system. Finally, retrofit devices designed to reduce emissions may be added to the PC system
so that the make and model information on the PC itself might not reflect expected emission
performance. For these reasons, it is necessary to acquire detailed information on each PC system
and process, including photos and optical gas imaging (OGI) video records. The details need to be
gathered in collaboration with knowledgeable ONG site representatives.
For all well pad PC systems, emissions to the atmosphere might be increased if the PC
system is malfunctioning or not well maintained. Emissions from a PC system can also be greater
than expected if the process or equipment the PC is associated with is not optimized. Well pad
emissions can also originate from fugitive sources that are nearby but not part of the PC system
(e.g., pneumatic supply gas or downstream tubing leaks). All of these categories of emissions (and
techniques for their identification and mitigation) are important and add complexity to the
development of PC emission factors (EFs). Activity factor (AF) information on well pad PCs is
also complicated by the varied actuation frequencies (emission events) within this source category
due to the range of application services. This collaborative project seeks to improve information
on a variety of factors affecting well pad PC emission characterization, for the benefit of multiple
parties.
The broader project team for this effort includes EPA’s Office of Research and
Development (ORD), EPA Region 8 (R8), Utah Division of Air Quality (UDAQ), Ute Tribe Air
Program, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Utah State and Vernal Field Offices, EPA ORD
contractor Jacobs Technology Inc. (Jacobs) and its subcontractor team, and participating Uinta
Basin ONG operators. The Measurement Technology Group of EPA’s Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards is advising on methods aspects for this project. Component manufacturers,
API, and other organizations have commented on the planning process. This field study is
primarily funded by an EPA ORD Regional Applied Research Effort (RARE) internal project grant
with EPA R8 and through the ORD Air Climate and Energy (ACE) Program, Task EM 1.2.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 12 of 45
This applied research effort includes experimental measurement approaches and is
conducted on a defined-scope, best-effort basis. This project is not part of any enforcement or
compliance activity or other EPA program. The cooperating Uinta Basin ONG operators
participating in the study will supply in-kind resources in the form of information, personnel, and
site access and shall remain anonymous for reporting purposes. The ONG operator participants
may review and comment on this QAPP and draft publications generated by the study. No
confidential business information will be recorded or maintained as part of this study. Information
gathered will be controlled and anonymized on a best-effort basis by the core EPA study team
(EPA ORD, EPA R8, and Jacobs). Site-specific information gathered, such as digital photographs,
OGI videos, and PC-related process and production information, will be fully available to the ONG
operator from which it was obtained but will not be shared with other participating ONG operators.
General site characteristics, pertinent production and process information, specific examples of PC
system configurations, photographs, OGI videos, emissions measurements, etc., will be reported
in an anonymized fashion and may be reviewed by participating ONG operators as part of the
publication development process. Information regarding the makes and models of PC systems will
be reported and specific site and emissions information (ONG operator anonymous) may be
reviewed with PC manufacturers as part of data analysis and the publication development process
to ensure the best available information is obtained.
This project will be conducted under EPA ORD Quality Assurance Category B –
Measurement Study. The data and information gathered in this project are intended for research
purposes only. The quality assurance (QA) category for this project is not appropriate for
enforcement or compliance activities. Information gathered will be constrained to PC systems and
associated fugitive emissions (e.g., tubing or valve actuator diaphragm/gasket leaks that could be
mistaken for PC emissions). As with any EPA field activity, if a potentially hazardous or
environmentally significant condition (e.g., a gathering pipeline leak) is observed during the field
study, EPA and Jacobs have the responsibility to immediately report this to both the company and
appropriate authorities.
1.2 Description and Purpose of This QAPP
This document is an EPA ORD field research QAPP. The purpose of this QAPP is to
describe details of a limited-scope field study (currently for up to 20 deployment days), to be
conducted in the Uinta Basin, Utah, in cooperation with ONG operators, that seeks to improve
information on well pad PC emissions and measurement methods. A single field team will conduct
measurements on well pads in a sequential fashion in cooperation with participating ONG
operators. This QAPP describes field measurements and QA procedures for the study. Data
analysis procedures are not detailed in this QAPP but will be fully documented in future
publications. This document is limited to QA aspects of the project and does not cover site-specific
safety planning for the field work.
In general, this QAPP outlines the procedures used by personnel conducting the monitoring
project to ensure that the data collected and analyzed meets project requirements. As a planning
and operating tool, the QAPP not only supports the quality of the project’s findings, but documents
the project’s goals, methods of data collection, storage, and analysis for current participants and
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 13 of 45
for those who may wish to use the project’s data over time. U.S. EPA–funded monitoring programs
must have an EPA-approved QAPP before sample collection begins.
1.3 Project Objectives
The primary objective of this effort is to improve information on Uinta Basin ONG well
pad PC emissions and measurement methods. A goal is to acquire PC emissions and activity data
of sufficient quality and breadth to help inform Uinta Basin emission inventories.1 The scientific
approach to achieving this objective centers on observational field studies of PC emissions to be
conducted in cooperation with ONG operators. The following secondary field study objectives are
listed in order of importance:
1. Safely conduct on-site data-gathering activities and PC emission measurements on
small to medium-size well pads in the Uinta Basin.
2. Understand and record information on well pad PCs and associated equipment and
processes of sufficient detail to support the following:
Real-time survey classification of PC types based on expected emission
frequency.
Post-assignment of PCs to classification schemes currently under development.
Accurate engineering-based emissions calculations.
3. Conduct quality-assured PC actuation frequency and emissions measurements.
4. Advance PC measurement methods and possibly conduct method comparisons.
5. Acquire limited speciated emissions measurements to support inventory development.
6. Demonstrate select research measurement methods to the extent possible.
7. Understand and document process-related effects on PC emissions where possible.2
8. Assess the maintenance states and repair potential of encountered PCs where
possible.2
The degree to which certain secondary objectives can be achieved will depend in part on site and
measurement selection decisions and will be discussed in reporting.
1 Due to the limited-scope nature of this study, the statistical representativeness of the populations of well pads visited and PCs sampled in relation to the overall Uinta Basin ONG inventory is not yet known. The limitations of
the acquired data set will be reported in publications along with the site selection decisions. The degree to which
certain secondary objectives may be achieved depends in part on site selection and will be discussed in reporting.
2 The use of some preselected sites will reduce emphasis on these secondary objectives as it is assumed that
preselected sites will be well maintained and typically free of operational issues.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 14 of 45
2.0 Project Organization and Responsibilities
2.1 Project Personnel
This work is being conducted by Jacobs for the Air Pollution Prevention and Control
Division (APPCD) of EPA’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) under
Research Laboratory Support (RLS) Contract EP-C-15-08, Work Assignment (WA) 1-037, “EPA
Region 8 Well Pad Studies.” In addition to Jacobs and its subcontractor personnel, EPA personnel
will be present on-site and conduct limited data-acquisition and information-gathering activities
described here. EPA personnel will be covered under a separate safety plan. In addition to the
Jacobs/EPA field team, the roles of the ONG operator on-site personnel are described here. Data
processing, publication development activities, and the roles of the broader study team, including
UDAQ, Ute Tribe Air Program, and BLM Utah State and Vernal Field Offices, are not described
in this field activity QAPP.
Project personnel for this effort will include multiple individuals from EPA, Jacobs, and
ONG operators in primary and supporting roles. The primary project personnel from EPA and
Jacobs are as follows:
Dr. Eben Thoma is the EPA ORD project lead and the WA contracting officer’s
representative (WACOR) for WA 1-037. He is responsible for communicating technical direction
to the Jacobs work assignment leader (WAL). Dr. Thoma provides technical oversight for the
project. Dr. Michael Stovern is the EPA R8 technical lead for the project. Dr. Stovern will
coordinate activities involving EPA R8 personnel and manage OGI data collection for the field
effort. EPA ORD NRMRL APPCD’s quality assurance (QA) manager, Ms. Libby Nessley, will
review and approve this QAPP and coordinate any requested audits through the EPA WACOR.
Ms. Nessley will review and approve all project reports before they are cleared for publication to
verify that the project was implemented as has been specified in this document.
Mr. Parik Deshmukh will serve as the Jacobs WAL. He will be responsible for preparing
project deliverables and managing the WA. He will ensure the project meets scheduled milestones
and stays within the budgetary constraints agreed upon by EPA. Mr. Deshmukh will be responsible
for managing subcontracts related to this WA and with coordinating ONG operators for on-site
work. Mr. Deshmukh will be responsible for training field personnel, executing the field work,
and providing preliminary data reduction and QA information. Mr. Deshmukh is also responsible
for drafting this document and assisting Ms. Giao Nguyen, the Jacobs health and safety officer,
with the Jacobs health and safety plan (HASP) for this effort. Mr. Chris Winterrowd, Jacobs
department manager, is the technical advisor to Mr. Deshmukh for this project. The Jacobs QA
officer (QAO), Ms. Zora Drake-Richman, is responsible for reviewing and approving the QAPP.
Ms. Drake-Richman will review and approve all project deliverables before they are submitted to
EPA to verify that the project was implemented as has been specified in this document. At this
time, no planned internal systems or performance audits are scheduled. However, Ms. Drake-
Richman has the authority to perform random internal audits on a regular basis on EPA/RLS
projects, as warranted by data quality issues or if requested by Dr. Thoma. Internal audits by Ms.
Drake-Richman will be coordinated through the Jacobs WAL.
The ONG on-site operator representative (OR) provided to the team for that field test day
will need to have sufficient knowledge of the sites to be visited. The ONG on-site OR will
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 15 of 45
accompany the team in the daily sampling activities, describe the PCs at each site, and indicate
which controllers can be sampled safely without disrupting a process.
Figure 2-1. Organizational chart
2.2 Project Schedule
This field study aims to achieve 20 field deployment measurement days (not necessarily
consecutive) and is planned to start in September 2016. The exact deployment dates are to be
determined based on site access discussions with participating ONG operators. The exact number
of field measurement days and the time scale for completion of field work will depend on
budgetary and technical factors and on-site access and weather constraints.
U.S. EPA
QA Manager
Libby Nessley
Department
Manager
Chris Winterrowd
WAL
Parik Deshmukh
WACOR
Eben Thoma
QAO
Zora Drake-Richman
Technical Editor
Stacy Henkle
Health and
Safety Officer
Giao Nguyen
Subcontractors/ Field Crew
Russell Logan
Communication
Reporting
Jacobs
ONG
ONG operators
R8 Lead
Michael Stovern
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 16 of 45
3.0 Scientific Approach
This study seeks to build on existing research and complement information that is currently
being produced by other groups (e.g., API PC standards subcommittee) and through other
programs. The procedures used for this project are adapted in part from previous studies (Allen et
al., 2013, 2014; OIPA, 2014; Prasino Group, 2013) with comments on previous approaches noted
(Howard, 2015a,b; Howard et al., 2015).
3.1 Uinta Basin ONG Operators and Site Selection
Figure 3-1 shows the general locations of well sites and ONG operators in the study region.
The different colored dots indicate the well pads operated by different ONG operators in the region.
For the purpose of this study, “Uinta Basin ONG operators” refers to ONG operations in Uintah
and Duchesne Counties, Utah. During the initial project planning phases, the study team contacted
all known Utah ONG operators to discuss the proposed study. Two webinars were held in May
and June 2016, and additional email and phone communications were subsequently conducted. As
of the time of QAPP preparation, the participating ONG operator list has yet to be finalized. For
this reason and because the participating sites and ONG operators will remain anonymous for
reporting purposes, the specific site details are not included in the QAPP.
Site selection is an important aspect of any field research effort as these decisions can affect
the strength of conclusions that can be logically drawn from a study. For this study, the specific
measurement site locations, dates, and times are not detailed in this QAPP. Site selection decisions
will be made by the project team including the participating ONG operators starting in early
September 2016. These details will be determined in part by the final list of ONG operators
agreeing to participate (the sites potentially available to the study), practical field sampling
considerations (e.g., travel time), and project team determinations of best study focus (e.g., gas or
oil well sites).
Site selection decisions and implications for this study will be analyzed and discussed in
project reporting. Site selection will likely follow the guidelines described here. A subset of Uinta
Basin ONG operators and their respective pools of candidate sites that meet final selection criteria
will be identified based on study resources, the list of potentially participating ONG operators, and
discussions of site type focus (e.g., old vs. new, gas vs. oil). The time frame for deployment will
be worked out with individual ONG operators, and the sites belonging to that operator will be
visited by the field team in a sequential fashion, typically over the course of several days, with the
goal of surveying multiple sites per day.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 17 of 45
Figure 3-1. Locations of ONG sites and operators in the study region
The pool of potentially available sites for an ONG operator may be divided into “daily
selected” and “preselected” categories. The former represents sites that are assumed not to have
undergone any special preparation, information gathering, or PC maintenance other than normal
company procedures and may be selected from the pool on a daily basis in a pseudo-random
fashion during the measurement campaign. The daily selected site is not a completely random
selection due to logistical considerations. The daily selected site will be selected randomly from a
pool of potential sites in an agreed-upon geographic region within reasonable driving distance
(e.g., < 1 h) to minimize field time spent on travel. Also, the ONG on-site operator representative
(OR) provided to the team for that field test day will need to have sufficient knowledge of the sites
visited, so this could further limit the available sites in the daily selection pool. If a second daily
selected site is visited that day, it will likely be chosen from a group of proximate sites to minimize
travel time. The procedures used for daily site selection (e.g., numbers of sites in the pool, selection
process) will be discussed in reporting.
A preselected site is a site that is either collaboratively selected or selected solely by the
ONG operator before the field team arrives. A preselected site may be visited by the ONG operator
prior to primary field measurements for the purpose of gathering information on the PC systems,
installing actuation counters, or perhaps performing special maintenance reviews or safety
screening. Possible advantages of preselection include (1) assurance of site type representative-
ness, (2) superior knowledge of site components and processes, (3) logistical advantages regarding
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 18 of 45
travel time, (4) deployment setup advantages, (5) data collection advantages regarding PC
actuation counting, and (6) improved statistical power by increasing the number of measurements
that can be made during the study. Disadvantages of site preselection center on the assumption that
observation of PC maintenance issues will be underrepresented compared to the daily site selection
process. For the purposes of the QAPP, a mixture of daily selected and preselected sites is assumed.
3.2 Understanding Emissions from PC Systems
Understanding emissions from PC systems is complicated by both uncertainty in
assignment of emissions and lack of standardized methods to measure all forms of PC emissions.
As described in subsequent sections, part of the challenge is to fully understand the design of the
PC system and its application so that the expected emission profile can be determined and its
nominal operational state assessed. This is made difficult by the very large number of PC
makes/models and application combinations, so knowledge transfer from the on-site OR is critical
for success of the measurement survey. Another important aspect of the assessment is to
understand which observed emissions are related to PC operation (or malfunction) and which are
not (e.g., proximate fugitive leaks). Two examples of PC systems are shown in Figure 3-2, with
additional discussion contained in many of the cited references.
Figure 3-2. Examples of well pad PCs: (a) separator PC and (b) thermostat PC on tank
3.3 Scientific Approach Overview
To achieve the study’s primary and secondary objectives, the scientific approach for this
study relies on information gathering of well pad PC systems and their process-specific
applications, with field measurements of PC emissions and PC actuation data (where possible).
This project will acquire information of sufficient detail to allow later assignment of the PC
systems encountered into the best available categorization schemes (e.g., API PC standards
currently under development). This project will use a simple, field survey–based PC system
categorization scheme based on the expected temporal characteristics of the emission profile:
(a) (b)
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 19 of 45
PCs that are not capable of emitting NG to the atmosphere
PCs that are not in operation due to seasonal or other reasons
Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate very infrequently (> every 1 day)
Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate infrequently (> every 15 min, but
< 1 day)
Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate frequently (< every 15 min)
Continuously emitting PCs
Malfunctioning PC or associated equipment or process
Using this PC-type classification framework, the following specific information and data
gathering will be executed as part of this project.
PC system, PC application, and well pad process parameter data will be gathered using
a system similar to that used by the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association
(OIPA, 2014). Acquired information will include well pad site details, PC
manufacturer, model number, actuator information, tubing length, and necessary PC-
related process information. This basic PC system information will be augmented with
other available information (e.g., date of installation, retrofit status, date of last
maintenance) if known by the ONG operator. This information-gathering activity will
improve knowledge of the types of PCs employed in the Uinta Basin (for the subset of
well pad types surveyed). These data, for example, will provide AF information on the
relative number of continuous and intermittent actuating PCs of various types in use.
This information will allow PC emissions engineering calculations to be compared to
PC emissions measurements. Additionally, this information will allow understanding
of the designed PC system emission profile so that deviations from nominal (e.g.,
malfunctions) can be detected and the potential for in-field repairs assessed (where
possible). See Appendix A: “Pneumatic Controller and Site Information-Gathering
Procedures” for details of this activity as well as examples of the field log sheets for
recording information.
OGI will be used to (1) assist in determination of safe operations for the field team, (2)
document specific aspects of PC operations and PC actuation frequency, (3) assist in
determining if an emission is from the PC system or from a nearby fugitive emission
source that is not part of the PC system, (4) assist in quality control (QC) aspects of the
project such as ensuring actuation counters and flow measurement systems are properly
installed, and (5) assist in documenting the nominal operational conditions of
encountered PC systems. To support the OGI measurements, hand-held leak detection
probes (HHPs), with sensitivity in parts per million (ppm), will be used to check for
emissions from all parts of the PC system, and “Snoop” leak detection liquid
(Swagelok) will be used to identify connection leaks in some cases. The exact
procedures for OGI use are described in Appendix B: “Optical Gas Imaging
Procedures.”
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 20 of 45
Limited PC actuation counting will be attempted for this project using the approaches
described in Appendix C: “PC Actuation Counting Procedures Using the SERN-5.”
This information will improve PC-related AF data, especially for the infrequently
actuating category of PC systems.
PC system emission measurements will be conducted using one or more approaches.
This information will improve PC-related EF data for the Uinta Basin. Measurements
might include flow meter measurements (see Appendix D: “Operating Procedures for
Flow Meter Measurements”) or determining the rate of gas leakage using the
Bacharach Hi Flow® sampler (BHFS) (see Appendix E: “Operating Procedure for
Augmented Bacharach Hi Flow Sampler Measurements”). As part of emissions
measurements, a limited amount of evacuated canister sampling will be conducted to
improve speciation data for Uinta inventories. These data will augment site-specific
gas data provided by the ONG operators, which will be necessary for the emissions
measurements. Procedures for canister sampling are given in Appendix F: “Evacuated
Canister Analysis Procedures.”
To the extent possible, measurement method development and method comparisons
will be conducted and some research measurements will be attempted. The use of
research measurements will be documented as an addendum to this QAPP.
To the extent possible, malfunctioning PC systems will be identified and the in-field
repair potential assessed, attempted, and documented.
3.4 Example Field Measurement Sequence
The following example site measurement sequence is provided to illustrate one possible
survey mode. The current example is for a daily selected site, but as previously discussed,
preselected sites are expected to play a large part in this study. For preselected sites, some of the
PC system and process information collection activities may be accomplished prior to the on-site
work and then confirmed by the on-site survey. Also, some preparation such as installation of
actuation counters might have already been accomplished for preselected sites.
Step 1: The ONG operator agrees to provide site access and on-site support for 2–4 days
during a specific calendar week, and a pool of potential sites in a geographic area is determined. It
is important that the on-site OR provided by the ONG operator can explain details of the PC
systems, can execute flow meter and actuation counter installation and manual PC actuation (when
safe to do so), and is authorized to provide safety oversight for the work. Since some of the
equipment used (e.g., OGI camera and digital camera) are not intrinsically safe, “hot work permits”
will be required. The health and safety plans for this project will address hot work permit
requirements. Some of the test procedures (e.g., installation of flow meters and PC actuation
counters) will require higher level review with the ONG operator. This information will be part of
operator-specific safety plans formulated by Jacobs and reviewed and agreed to by the ONG
operator.
Step 2: On the day of measurement, a well pad is selected from the pool of potential sites
by Jacobs (daily selected). Prior to arrival at the site (or designated meeting location), the Jacobs
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 21 of 45
field team will have already performed daily instrument time synchronizations and QA calibration
procedures on all measurement equipment (as described in Section 5). These daily QC records will
be shown to the OR on request. With the OR, the field team will review safety plans and perform
safety checks including an area OGI site safety survey (Appendix B). The safe use limitations and
required stand-off distances of non-intrinsically safe devices such as digital cameras and OGI
cameras will be discussed and documented. The safety review will be documented on the form
contained in Appendix A and initialed by the OR.
Step 3: A basic site layout drawing will be made by the Jacobs team lead indicating the
position of major equipment at the site (Appendix A). All pneumatic devices on the well pad are
identified in a walk-through with the OR. PCs are identified from the pneumatic device group and
entered into a site layout and record form (Appendix A) using a unique ID. Detailed information
on the PCs (make/model, depressurization method, service type) and their process function will be
determined and recorded in direct consultation with the OR. Each PC will be photographed from
multiple angles and file names logged on the checklist described in Appendix A, including the
physical measurements needed for engineering calculation of emissions. Some necessary
information, such as site gas composition, may be provided by the operator at another time. The
information gathered will be as comprehensive as possible to provide the greatest opportunity for
linking to other work in the future (e.g., developing API PC classification standards). Information
gathered should include age and maintenance factors for the PCs if available. See Appendix A for
further information.
Step 4: One or more OGI survey records (Appendix B) are produced for each PC with
video file names and notes logged appropriately in the OGI section of the form in Appendix A.
The video records will be recorded even if no OGI-visible emissions are present. The video records
will be approximately 2 min in duration and will consist of an OGI color photo, followed by normal
imaging mode video for approximately 1 min, and then high-sensitivity imaging video for
approximately 1 min (all contained in the same video record). Step 4 has multiple purposes. One
purpose is to document each PC in the “as encountered state” prior to any control loop shutdown
for installation of PC actuation counters or flow meters. This is necessary because it has been
suggested that shutting down the process to install flow meters can reset a malfunctioning PC state
in some cases (Howard, 2015b). We assume here that a hypothetical malfunctioning state of an
intermittent actuating PC manifests as near-continuous emissions from the PC that can be easily
registered by a short-duration OGI survey. As discussed previously, we assume normal seepage
emissions of an intermittent actuating PC system (when not actuating) are likely well below the
detection sensitivity of the OGI camera, especially in normal imaging mode (Simpson, 2014).
As part of Step 4, HHPs with ppm sensitivity will be used to check for emissions on all
parts of the PC system, and “Snoop” liquid (Swagelok) will be used in some cases. Attempts will
be made to determine and video-document the origin of observed emissions from the PC system.
For example, it may be determined that a tubing connection in the vicinity of the PC, and not the
PC itself, is the emission source. This information will be appropriately noted in saved video files.
Step 5: Using information from Step 3, in coordination with the OR, each PC system will
be assigned to one of the on-site survey categories listed below based on the best available
understanding of the design and purpose of the PC system and the expected actuation frequency
with intermittent throttling applications typically defaulting to group (f).
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 22 of 45
(a) PCs that are not NG-driven, are recorded, but are not subject to measurements.
(b) PCs that are associated with non-operating processes (seasonal or decommissioned).
These will be recorded in steps (3) and (4) but are not subject to further measurements
unless emissions are observed in Step 4.
(c) Zero bleed (self-contained) PCs. These are PCs that should not emit to the atmosphere.
(d) Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate very infrequently (> every 1 day).
(e) Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate infrequently (> every 15 min, but < 1 day).
(f) Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate frequently (< 15 min).
(g) Continuous PCs.
(h) Potentially malfunctioning PC or process (established in subsequent steps).
See Appendix A for further information and the field log sheet.
Step 6: In coordination with the OR, compare expected behavior of the PC system
established by make/model/application analysis (Step 5) with the OGI and HHP observations
(Step 4) and log findings on the Appendix A form. This discussion might require additional OGI
video observations and HHP tests (or Snoop liquid test) to help pinpoint the origin of emission to
determine if it is related to the PC system. Depending on the PC group assigned in Step 5,
observation of emissions during the OGI/HHP survey will mean different things and indicate
different subsequent procedure steps. For group (g), OGI-observed emissions can confirm the
continuous PC bin. If a group (c) through (f) PC is observed to be continuously emitting and a
careful inspection confirms that the emission is not a nearby fugitive or tubing leak source, the PC
could be misclassified—actually a continuous PC group (g) or a very frequently actuating PC in
group (f)—or possibly assigned to group (h) as a malfunctioning PC or process.
Step 7 – PC Emissions Measurements 1: Prior to installation of any equipment that
requires control loop shutdown, an initial series of emissions measurements will be made on select
PC systems using the augmented BHFS protocol (Appendix E), with results recorded in the
appropriate section of Appendix A.
If Step 4 (OGI/HHP survey) reveals no continuous emissions from PCs at the site, this step
may be skipped as the continuous emissions will be assumed to be minimal with regard to
malfunction and below the assessment capability of the BHFS.
If continuous emissions are observed in Step 4, the emissions will be measured using three
replicates (minimum of one) using the augmented BHFS approach (if deemed safe to do so) and
results logged on the form shown in Appendix A.
Step 8 – PC Emissions Measurements 2: Using information from previous steps,
measurements will be made using a combination of installed flow meters (Appendix D) and
augmented BHFS (Appendix E). For this project, BHFS measurements will be limited primarily
to assessment of apparently continuous emissions, or for use in cases where installed flow meters
are potentially problematic or unsafe.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 23 of 45
In preparation for potential installed flow meter measurements, safety considerations
and process impact for the proposed control loop shutdown, equipment installation, and
reenergize step will be evaluated and only attempted if the OR approves the action.
Some PCs, such safety devices, might trigger a well shut-in on loss of gas pressure (very
high process impact), so these PCs (usually very infrequently actuating) will not be assessed with
installed flow meters. In all cases, the potential process impact on downstream PCs will be deduced
and noted if possible. If installation of the flow meter is not possible due to safety, configuration,
or process concerns and continuous emissions are observed in Step 5, the augmented BHFS will
be used to measure the emission if possible.
If feasible and if time allows, emission measurements will be attempted on all PCs in
groups (d) through (h) at the site using the prioritization scheme described below. The default
measurement time period will be 15 min to 1 h. For continuous emissions, the sampling time may
be reduced to approximately 5 min or lower in some cases if the emission appears to be temporally
stable. It is acknowledged that the following measurement prioritization ranking is biased toward
higher emitting PCs.
(1) If a suspected malfunctioning PC, in Group (h)l, is encountered, it will be a high priority
for emissions measurement because the in-field repair secondary objective may be
attempted (Step 10) and because this condition might disproportionately impact
emissions.
(2) If a PC appears to be a relatively significant emitter in Step 4 (e.g., continuous PC or
heavily throttling (process-driven) intermittent PC), it will be a very high priority for
emissions measurement since this type of PC can possess higher time-averaged
emissions compared to infrequently actuating PCs, and natural actuation events will be
easily logged in the base observation window of 15 min to 1 h. These may be PCs in
Group (g) or group (f) with apparently very high actuation frequency (e.g., < 5 min).
(3) Intermittent PCs that are observed to be relatively frequently acting, in Group (f) with
cycle times less than 15 min, are a high priority for emissions measurement since this
type of PC can possess higher time-averaged emissions compared to infrequently
actuating PCs, and natural actuation events are possible to log in the base 15-min
observation window. Another consideration is the expected actuation volume (if
deemed high).
(4) Intermittent PCs that are believed to be relatively infrequently acting, in Group (e) with
cycle times of > 15 min but < 1 hour, for example, are a medium priority for emissions
measurements. If the PC is judged to be a candidate for manual actuation and/or if
expected actuation volume is deemed higher than normal, this will increase the priority
of the measurements. If the PC is judged to be problematic for measurement by
installed flow meters (e.g., instrumentation is potentially unsafe or would cause high
process impact, coupling is technically problematic, manual actuations are judged to
be potentially not representative), it will be a lower priority for measurement.
(5) Intermittent PCs that are judged to be very infrequently actuating, in Group (d) and
> 1 day, and/or are problematic for installed flow meters (e.g., instrumentation is
potentially unsafe or would cause high process impact, coupling is technically
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 24 of 45
problematic, manual actuations are judged to be potentially not representative) will be
the lower priority for measurement. If an infrequently actuating intermittent PC is not
observed to be emitting in Step 4 and is very difficult to (or cannot be) instrumented
with installed flow meters, it will be classified as a very low overall priority for
emissions measurement since the degree to which the augmented BHFS procedure can
assess these PCs is not well understood at this time.
(6) Any PC system that cannot be measured safely with either installed flow meters or
augmented BHFS will not be measured.
It is believed that emissions measurements can be conducted on some infrequently
actuating intermittent PC systems using a manually triggered actuation. The ability to manually
actuate and measure a PC emission depends on a number of factors including PC system design,
monitoring fixture options, and safety and process considerations. Manual actuations of
infrequently actuating PCs may be attempted on an experimental basis (upon approval by the OR)
if the natural actuation event is not observed in the base time period of 15 min to 1 h. For these
cases, a repeat 15-min observation may be used with a second manual actuation toward the end of
the period. The manual actuation procedure will be detailed in field notes.
Step 9 – PC Actuation Counting: In coordination with the OR, the team will assess the
feasibility of installing the PC actuation counters on the power gas tubing from the controller to
the valve actuator for PCs in Groups (e), (d), and possibly (f) that do not show continuous
emissions in the OGI survey, as per Appendix B. This step will be executed by the OR and will
require proper control loop shutdown and restart and will be potentially coordinated with flow
meter installations (Step 8). The selected PCs will be monitored for actuation events while
measurements are being made on other PCs. The target sampling period of 2–3 hours or longer
must be approved by the OR. It will be important to ensure that other measurement activities (such
as installation of flow meters on other PCs) do not affect this monitoring activity.
PCs from group (f) might or might not be included in this PC actuation counting category.
If the group (f) PC is obviously actuating with a high frequency (< 15 min) or is a near-continuous
throttling application, it does not need to be monitored with an actuation counter since its temporal
profile will be captured by the installed flow meter measurement. With a limited number of
counters and a limited amount of time on-site, a prioritization scheme will be developed in
coordination with the OR to ensure procedures are realistic and measurements remain on schedule.
Manual actuation of these PCs (if possible) might be required to ensure proper setup, but these
events could also be measured as part of Step 8.
Step 10: For PCs that are identified by the OGI/HHP survey to be potentially
malfunctioning—possible assignment to group (h)—a complete record set will be acquired
including emission measurements and OGI videos. It is likely that installed flow meter
measurements will be used to assess group (h) candidates because the temporal resolution provided
by the measurement can be a powerful diagnostic for later analysis. Upon completion of the
measurement set on a potential group (h) PC, the OR (or PC manufacturer if on-site) may attempt
an in-field corrective action if it is deemed feasible/safe. The details of the repair will be recorded.
The installed flow meter will be left in place during the operation, and the PC will be reassessed
by emission measurement and OGI after corrective action.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 25 of 45
Step 11: Evacuated Canister Acquisition. As part of Step 8, typically one evacuated
canister per site will be acquired during the PC emission measurements (Appendix F).
Step 12: Research measurements such as quantitative OGI and in-field speciation (e.g.,
using Precisive® Tunable Filter Spectroscopy [TFS™] by MKS Instruments) might be conducted
as resources and time allow. These measurements will be described in an addendum to this QAPP.
Step 13: Decommission site measurements and complete logs and chain of custody
information.
Step 14: Back up data for each site visited at the end of the day.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 26 of 45
4.0 Information, Measurement, and Analysis Procedures
4.1 Information-Gathering and Measurement Systems
This section details the primary information-gathering and measurement systems to be used
in this study. This information is listed in Table 4-1 in the order used in the deployment sequence.
Table 4-1. Information-Gathering and Measurement Systems
No. Instrument or Technique Make/Model or Approach Parameter Measured
1 PC, process, application and classification information
Information gathering using established procedures (Appendix A)
Systems information recorded
2 OGI mid-wave IR camera GF320, FLIR, North Billerica, MA (Appendix B)
Safety survey and video files of emissions or documentation of no observable emissions
3 PC actuation counters SERN-5 pneumatic counter, Control Equipment Inc., Wichita Falls, TX (Appendix C)
PC actuation events counted
4 Installed flow measurement devices
FT3 INLINE-0uP-SS-ST-E1-D0-MB-G3-G3, Fox Thermal Instruments, Marina, CA MW-10S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ MW-100S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ MW-500S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ Custom four-channel, C1D2 cable, data acquisition panel for installed flow meters, Techstar Inc., Deer Park, TX (Appendix D)
Time-resolved whole-gas flow rates of PC emissions at 1 Hz data collection frequency
5 Augmented BHFS BHFS, Bacharach Inc., New Kensington, PA (Appendix E)
Manually recorded whole-gas flow rates of continuous emissions with 100% exhaust BHFS concentration monitoring by flame ionization detector (FID)
5a HHP: sensitive hydrocarbon (HC) leak measurement
PPM Gas Surveyor 500, Heath Consultants, Houston TX, or Gas Rover, Bascom-Turner Instruments, Norwood, MA
HC leak detection supporting OGI survey and HC concentration measurements at the exhaust of the BHFS as a QA check
5b HHP: sensitive methane (CH4) and HC leak measurement
Detecto Pak-Infrared (DP-IR™), Heath Consultants, Houston, TX
CH4 with HC interference leak detection supporting OGI survey and concentration measurements at the exhaust of BHFS as a QA check
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 27 of 45
No. Instrument or Technique Make/Model or Approach Parameter Measured
5c HHP: FID Thermo Scientific, TVA-1000B, Waltham, MA
HC leak detection supporting OGI survey and HC concentration measurements at the exhaust of the BHFS as a QA check
6 Subatmospheric canisters/ laboratory analysis
Silonite canisters, Entech Instruments, Simi Valley, CA / laboratory subcontractor analysis (Appendix F)
Compound speciation (limited application)
4.1.1 PC, Process, Application, and Classification Information
This section and associated appendices outline procedures to document the PC systems
encountered in the field. The procedures used here build on those described by OIPA (2014) and
other efforts. As previously discussed, one objective of the project is to obtain information of
sufficient detail to allow later categorization according to separately developed PC classification
standards and to allow comparisons with engineering calculations if possible. These PC system
data-gathering procedures fit into the stepwise field survey approach described in Section 3.4. In
addition to PC information, the procedure helps to identify the emission measurement priorities in
potentially malfunctioning PC systems. These stepwise procedures are documented on the field
log sheets shown in Appendix A. Preselected sites offer advantages for accurate characterization
of PC system details since some work can be done beforehand and the work can be more complete
and accurate. For daily selected sites, the ONG on-site OR must provide information support for
these data-gathering activities, so knowledgeable personnel are required. Examples of information
gathered on the field form in Appendix A include the following:
Well pad information (ID, location, formation, layout)
Gas, water, and condensate production information (can be provided at a later date)
Gas composition information (can be provided at a later date)
Basic description of PCs on the well pad (operating and non-operating processes)
PC manufacturer information (make/model/year)
Information on PC date of installation, maintenance, or retrofit status (if known)
Digital photographs and OGI video of the PC systems
Process function of each PC
Process variables required for engineering calculations
Physical measurements required for engineering calculations
Collaborative estimation of PC actuation frequency (including on-site observation)
Collaborative assignment to survey PC type category (based on actuation frequency)
Collaborative assessment of PC system maintenance state (malfunctioning or nominal)
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 28 of 45
Jacobs will collect and summarize information gathered using field worksheets. It is
envisioned that this information will be summarized in a separate database for each ONG operator
that contains hyperlinks to specific photographs and OGI videos. This database will include PC
emission measurement results in addition to engineering calculations where possible. The
company-specific database will be shared only with the ONG site operator for review. If agreeable
to the ONG operators, some select information might be shared with PC manufacturers for
diagnostic purposes. As part of collaborative reporting, information from the individual ONG
operator databases will be rolled up and anonymized for group discussion and publication.
4.1.2 Optical Gas Imaging and Hand-Held Leak Detection Probes
OGI is an emission survey tool that allows direct observation of normally invisible CH4,
HC, and other air pollutant emissions from a variety of sources. OGI systems work in a sub-region
of the IR spectrum where molecules that make up the emission plume can absorb or emit energy
(IR photons). The OGI camera looks at a scene and records a video image, similar to a standard
video camera except OGI records IR photons emitted from objects in the background and by the
gas itself. If an HC fugitive or vented gas emission is present, the molecules in the plume can net
absorb IR radiation (or net emit if hotter than the scene), producing a visible contrast (detection)
in the image. The OGI camera (Figure 4-1) used in this study is a FLIR model GF320 (FLIR
Systems, Billerica, MA) operating in the 3.2 to 3.4 µm spectral region, which is appropriate for
upstream oil and gas use.
Figure 4-1. FLIR GF320 OGI camera
The OGI camera (general operation procedures described in Appendix B) will be used in
the following ways in this study: scanning of site for safety checks, assisting in identification of
PC system types (Appendix A), identifying fugitive emissions not associated with the PC systems,
and providing QA support of actuation counting emissions measurements (Appendices C–F), as
well as supporting research measurements, if used. The OGI camera will be used in both hand-
held survey mode with the camera operator scanning the site and components and relaying
information to the study team and in tripod-mounted mode where the cameras is set to record a
close-up of a component for some period of time to document some aspect of the measurement or
observation. The various uses of OGI, operational modes, duration of videos, and the archiving of
video are described in the appendices. Since OGI cameras are not intrinsically safe devices
(potential ignition sources), strict safety precautions and appropriate stand-off distances must be
used in close coordination with the site operator. The use of OGI, digital cameras, and installed
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 29 of 45
flow meters that will require special permissions and hot work permits will be described in the
approved site safety plan for each ONG operator. The OGI camera is a high-value EPA-owned
asset, and it is currently planned to be operated only by EPA personnel as part of the study. EPA
personnel will transfer videos to the Jacobs WAL daily for backup.
To support OGI, hand-held HHPs with ppm sensitivity will be used to check all parts of
the PC systems for sustained emissions. HHPs are further described in Section 4.1.5.
4.1.3 PC Actuation Counters
PC actuation counters are proposed to be used on a limited experimental basis to improve
understanding of infrequently actuating PC systems. Actuation counting might not be used at all
sites due to resource constraints and/or ONG operator use restrictions. Actuation counters will not
be used on continuous PCs, frequently actuating on/off intermittent PCs, or near-continuous
throttling applications since the PC emissions measurements should sufficiently acquire actuation
data from these PC system types. Figure 4-2 shows a model SERN-5 pneumatic counter from
Control Equipment Inc. (CEI; Wichita Falls, TX). These counters were developed originally for
lease custody transfer units (commonly called barrel counters) but are believed to work robustly
to register actuations for a variety of on/off intermittent PCs. The actuation counters will be
installed on the power gas tubing from the controller to the valve actuator and are limited to 30 psi.
These counters will not work well with throttling PCs since the frequent small pressure spikes will
be inconsistently registered. A pre- and post-deployment test procedure was developed by the
ORD NRMRL Quality Assurance Metrology (MET) Laboratory to characterize the range of
operation (on the low end) and repeatability of the counter. This information, along with
installation instructions, is included in Appendix C.
Figure 4-2. Model SERN-5 pneumatic counter (not fully installed)
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 30 of 45
4.1.4 PC Emissions Measurements by Flow Meters
One of the main objectives of the Uinta Basin Well Pad Pneumatic Controller Emissions
Research Study is to conduct quality-assured PC emissions measurements. This section describes
the use of installed flow meter measurements as part of the study. By using four flow meters with
different ranges, emissions can potentially be measured over a wide range. Table 4-2 lists the
equipment that will be used to conduct the emissions rate measurements. Figure 4-3 shows the
flow meters used in the project.
The flow meter will be installed in line with the PC after the system has been depressurized.
It is expected that on-site ORs will assist in this installation process. The flow meters can be used
independently of each other or in series depending on the leak rate to be measured. All four flow
meters will log data directly to a four-channel C1D2 data acquisition system (Techstar Inc., Deer
Park, TX), which has the ability to log data from four different flow meters at 1 Hz. The flow
meters will be equipped with Swagelok fittings and appropriate lengths of tubing to ensure their
adaptability to different PC configurations. Two Excel spreadsheets will be used to reduce flow
data. The Kimray spreadsheet is used to produce the engineering emission estimates from the
PCs. The Alicat spreadsheet is used to correct the Alicat meter data for gas stream composition
differences. Both spreadsheets, as well as further information on the operating procedures for the
flow meters can be found in Appendix D: “Operating Procedures for Flow Meter Measurements.”
Table 4-2. Equipment Used for PC Emissions Flow Meter Measurements
Device Manufacturer Model Range / Description
Calibration system mass flow controller (MFC)
Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MCR-100S Lpm-D-485-MODBUS-X / 5M, 5IN
0.5–100 slpm
Flow meter 1 Fox Thermal Instruments, Marina, CA
FT3 INLINE-0uP-SS-ST-E1-D0-MB-G3-G3,
0–24 (nom.) – 47 slpm
0–47 (nom.) – 235 slpm
Flow meter 2 Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-500S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X/5M
2.5–500 slpm
Flow meter 3 Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-100S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X/5M
0.5–100 slpm
Flow meter 4 Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-10S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X
0.05–10 slpm
Data acquisition system for recording data
Techstar Inc., Deer Park, TX
Four-channel C1D2 DAQ for installed flow meters
1 Hz start/stop data acquisition panel
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 31 of 45
Figure 4-3. Fox Thermal flow meter FT3 (left) and Alicat flow meter (right)
4.1.5 PC Emissions Measurements by Augmented BHFS
Emissions measurements will also be conducted using a BHFS (Bacharach, Inc., New
Kensington, PA) with an augmented QA protocol to quantify emission rates of continuously
emitting pneumatic devices and any nearby fugitive emissions that might have an effect on flow
meter–based PC emission measurements. Due to recent discussions regarding the validity of BHFS
measurements (Howard et al., 2015), the use of a QA measurement device at the exhaust of the
sampler will be an essential component of this study.
The BHFS (Figure 4-4) is a portable, intrinsically safe, battery-powered instrument that
non-invasively measures the rate of gas emissions from a variety of sources. The system is
designed for and calibrated to CH4, but measures all combustible compounds (all HCs) in the
sampled emission stream. With a properly operating instrument, the measured emission rate of a
CH4/mixed HC stream (as encountered in upstream ONG applications in wet gas areas) will
deviate from actual due to both internal sensor response and flow rate effects. The instrument is
packaged inside a backpack, thus leaving the operator’s hands free. A component’s leak rate is
measured by sampling at a high flow rate (up to 10.5 scfm) so as to capture all the gas emitted
from the component along with some amount of surrounding air. For the BHFS measurements, the
instrument-determined emission rate is calculated using Equation 4-1:
Emission (cfm)= Emission % – Background %
100 × Flow (cfm) (4-1)
where:
Emission (cfm) = Flow rate of emission in cubic feet per minute
Emission % = Volume percent of HC in the sample stream
Background % = Volume percent of HC in the background sampling area
Flow (cfm) = Flow rate of sample and background air in cubic feet per minute
The BHFS response is calibrated at 2.5% and 100% CH4 before each day’s trials. The
augmented QA protocol refers to secondary measurements of the BHFS exhaust to confirm the
leak rate (%) determinations are similar to those of Stovern et al. (2016).
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 32 of 45
Figure 4-4. Bacharach Hi Flow sampler (BHFS) with some attachments
The current choices for QA measuring systems are the TVA-1000B (Thermo Scientific
Waltham, MA) for the low end and either a PPM Gas Surveyor 500 (Gas Measurement Instruments
Ltd, Renfrew, Scotland) or a Gas Rover (Bascom-Turner Instruments Inc., Norwood, MA) as
shown in Figure 4-5. Further information on the operating procedures for the flow meters can be
found in Appendix E: “Operating Procedure for Augmented Bacharach Hi Flow Sampler
Measurements.”
Figure 4-5. TVA-1000B (left), PPM Gas Surveyor 500 (middle), and Gas Rover (right)
4.1.6 Evacuated Canister Acquisition and Analysis
Evacuated canister samples will be collected on a limited basis as part of this PC emissions
study. A target of at least one canister per site or site gas type will be attempted with additional
samples being collected depending on the number of controllers at the site, number of emitting
controllers, and several other factors. The acquisition of these subatmospheric canister samples
will be conducted either at the exhaust of the BHFS or as part of the installed flow meter
measurements. Samples will be collected in specially cleaned and evacuated 1.4-liter Silonite®
canisters (part no. 29-MC1400SQT) manufactured by Entech Instruments (Simi Valley, CA).
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 33 of 45
Canisters will be sampled using a simple collection system consisting of stainless steel tubing,
sintered filter, in-line vacuum gauge, and manually operated toggle valve that, when open, acquires
a fast grab sample over a 20-second time period (typically reducing canister pressure from stated
values of 25–28 in. Hg to 7–9 in. Hg). The 1.4-liter canister is connected to the collection system
by a quick connect fitting. The sample is collected by inserting the collection system and canister
into the exhaust stream of the BHFS. The initial and final vacuum values of the canister are
recorded on the sample chain of custody (COC) form. If the vacuum is not between 25 and 28 in.
Hg, sampling is aborted and a new canister is used. Sample ID, canister number, and final pressure
of each sample are recorded on the COC form.
The evacuated canister grab samples of selected pneumatic devices will be analyzed for
C2–C12 by EPA Method TO-14A (U.S. EPA, 1999) and for CH4 using Modified EPA Method 18
(U.S. EPA, 2013). The TO-14A analysis is similar to the original photochemical assessment
monitoring stations (PAMS) approach; however, all compounds are individually calibrated instead
of reporting all compounds using a carbon response factor derived from a propane calibration
curve.
The subcontractor selected for the canister sample analysis has worked with EPA to
develop an approved approach to use EPA Method 18 to analyze fuel samples collected in canisters
for HCs. The approved alternative is EPA ALT100 and is very similar to the American Society for
Testing and Materials D1945 approach (ASTM, 2010).
The canister grab samples will also be analyzed for the compounds listed in Table 4-3
(PAMS compounds). For the PAMS compound analysis, the samples will be cryogenically
concentrated and analyzed by gas chromatography/flame ionization detector (GC/FID). Further
details about the canister acquisition and analysis are provided in Appendix F: “Evacuated Canister
Analysis Procedures.”
Table 4-3. List of PAMS Target VOCs
Compound Class
Acetylene Olefin
Ethylene Olefin
Ethane Paraffin
Propylene Olefin
Propane Paraffin
Isobutane Paraffin
1-Butene Olefin
n-Butane Paraffin
trans-2-Butene Olefin
cis-2-Butene Olefin
Isopentane Paraffin
1-Pentene Olefin
n-Pentane Paraffin
Isoprene Olefin
trans-2-Pentene Olefin
Continued on next page
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 34 of 45
Compound Class
cis-2-Pentene Olefin
2,2-Dimethylbutane Paraffin
Cyclopentane Paraffin
2,3-Dimethylbutane Paraffin
2-Methylpentane Paraffin
3-Methylpentane Paraffin
2-Methyl-1-pentene Olefin
n-Hexane Paraffin
Methylcyclopentane Paraffin
2,4-Dimethylpentane Paraffin
Benzene Aromatic
Cylcohexane Paraffin
2-Methylhexane Paraffin
2,3-Dimethylpentane Paraffin
3-Methylhexane Paraffin
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane Paraffin
n-Heptane Paraffin
Methylcyclohexane Paraffin
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane Paraffin
Toluene Aromatic
2-Methylheptane Paraffin
3-Methylheptane Paraffin
n-Octane Paraffin
Ethylbenzene Aromatic
m/p-Xylene Aromatic
Styrene Aromatic
o-Xylene Aromatic
n-Nonane Paraffin
Isopropylbenzene Aromatic
n-Propylbenzene Aromatic
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene Aromatic
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene Aromatic
o-Ethyltoluene Aromatic
m-Ethyltoluene Aromatic
p-Ethyltoluene Aromatic
m-Diethylbenzene Aromatic
p-Diethylbenzene Aromatic
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene Aromatic
n-Decane Paraffin
n-Undecane Paraffin
Total non-methane organic compounds
Total speciated PAMS hydrocarbons
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 35 of 45
4.1.7 Temperature and Pressure Measurement
Ambient temperature measurements will be conducted using a digital thermometer
(Traceable Control Company, Webster, TX). Pressure measurements were made using an M1
Series digital manometer (Meriam Process Technology, Cleveland, OH). The temperature and
pressure measurements will be conducted at each well pad site on arrival and recorded on the
checklist shown in Appendix A.
The pressure sensor we used was a. We also need to correct the temperature instrument
used to: Digital Thermometer by.
4.2 On-Site Procedures
Site-specific procedures to be followed will vary based on individual ONG companies,
each company’s health and safety procedures will be followed. An example of daily sampling
procedures is given in section 3.4 of this QAPP.
4.3 Critical Measurements
The critical measurements for the field experiments are presented in Table 4-4.
Table 4-4. Critical Measurements
Measurement Parameter Technique Cycle Time
Video record Optically capture and quantify entire leak activity
OGI mid-wave IR camera Variable
Liters per minute Whole-gas emission rates Installed flow meter 1 Hz
Leak rate (lpm) Leak rate (%)
Whole-gas emission rates BHFS (Bacharach, Inc., New Kensington, PA)
0.3 Hz
Evacuated canister sample
Speciated HCs Subatmospheric evacuated canister samples
N/A
Leak rate (%) or concentration value
CH4 emission rate at BHFS exhaust and leak identification in support of OGI survey
FID, TVA-1000B (Thermo Scientific Waltham, MA)
1 Hz
Leak rate (%) or concentration value
CH4 emission rate at BHFS exhaust and leak identification in support of OGI survey
PPM Gas Surveyor 500 (Gas Measurement Instruments Ltd, Renfrew, Scotland)
1 Hz
Leak rate (%) or concentration value
CH4 emission rate at BHFS exhaust and leak identification in support of OGI survey
Gas Rover, (Bascom-Turner Instruments Inc. Norwood, MA)
1 Hz
Counts Number of times a PC actuates Model SERN-5 PC (CEI, Wichita Falls, TX)
1 count per actuation
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 36 of 45
5.0 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
5.1 Data Quality Indicator Goals
Table 5-1 lists the data quality indicator (DQI) goals for the project.
Table 5-1. DQI Goals for the Project
Measurement Parameter
Analysis Method Assessment Accuracy Precision
Flow rate FT3 INLINE-0uP-SS-ST-E1-D0-MB-G3-G3, Fox Thermal Instruments, Marina, CA
MW-100S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-500S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
50 lpm of CH4 gas delivered using a MET laboratory certified MFC. Gas allowed to flow for 1 min.
10% of expected flow rate or ± 2.5 lpm
± 10%
MW-10S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
5 lpm of CH4 gas delivered using a MET laboratory certified MFC. Gas allowed to flow for 1 min.
10% of expected flow rate or ± 0.25 lpm
± 10%
HC leak rate BHFS, Bacharach, Inc., New Kensington, PA
Multi-point calibration check prior to study using an Environics gas divider.
Zero/span calibration setting prior to daily field deployment.
Multi-point calibration check post-study using an Environics gas divider.
20% of set CH4 flow rates for multi-point checks.
10% of known CH4 cylinder concentration for single-point checks.
± 20%
HC concentration measurement from leaking component or at BHFS exhaust
FID TVA-1000B, Thermo Scientific Waltham, MA
Multi-point calibration check prior to study using an Environics gas divider.
Zero/span one-point verification check prior to daily field deployment.
Multi-point calibration check post-study using an Environics gas divider.
20% of set CH4 flow rates for multi-point checks.
20% of known CH4 cylinder concentration for single-point checks.
± 20%
Continued on next page
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 37 of 45
Measurement Parameter
Analysis Method Assessment Accuracy Precision
HC concentration measurement from leaking component or at BHFS exhaust
PPM Gas Surveyor 500, Gas Measurement Instruments Ltd, Renfrew, Scotland
Multi-point calibration check prior to study using an Environics gas divider.
Zero/span one-point verification check prior to daily field deployment.
Multi-point calibration check post-study using an Environics gas divider.
20% of set CH4 flow rates for multi-point checks.
20% of known CH4 cylinder concentration for single-point checks.
± 20%
HC concentration measurement from leaking component or at BHFS exhaust
Gas Rover, Bascom-Turner Instruments Inc., Norwood, MA
Multi-point calibration check prior to study using an Environics gas divider.
Zero/span one-point verification check prior to daily field deployment.
Multi-point calibration check post-study using an Environics gas divider.
20% of set CH4 flow rates for multi-point checks.
20% of known CH4 cylinder concentration for single-point checks.
± 20%
Additionally, the OGI camera DQI will be assessed by visualizing the emissions from the
BHFS exhaust during the daily span procedure. Actuation counters will be evaluated using a
Mensor APC-600 (automated pressure calibrator) containing a 0 to 100 psig pressure module
(± 0.01 psi uncertainty), as shown in Figure 5-1. Actuation counters will first be evaluated to
determine actuation pressure by slowly increasing pressure until the device triggers. The actuation
counters will then be subjected to a series of 10 pressure pulses greater than their actuation
pressure. Each pulse will be followed by a complete depressurization of the actuation counter. The
actuation counters will be considered acceptable if their actuation pressure is below 5 psig and
they count all 10 pulsed actuation cycles.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 38 of 45
Figure 5-1. Mensor APC-600 with actuation counter attached.
5.1.1 Accuracy
Accuracy of measurement parameters is determined by comparing a measured value to a
known standard, assessed in terms of percent bias using Equation 5-1:
%100Standard
tMeasuremen1
Bias (5-1)
Percent bias measurements are expected to fall within the tolerances shown in Table 5-1.
5.1.2 Precision
Precision is evaluated by making replicate measurements of the same parameter and
assessing the variations of the results. Precision is assessed in terms of relative percent difference,
or relative standard deviation. The replicate measurement points will be one specific parameter
value within the measurement range of each instrument listed in Table 5-1, and replicate
measurements are expected to fall within the tolerances shown in the table.
5.2 Assessment of DQI Goals
The QC checks used in the field to assess the DQI goals are provided in Table 5-2.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 39 of 45
Table 5-2. Procedures Used to Assess QA Objectives
Measurement Parameter
Analysis Method Assessment Method
Flow rate FT3 flow meter, Fox Thermal Instruments, Marina, CA
Alicat flow meters – 100 and 500 slpm, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
Multiple in-field single-point checks: 50 lpm of CH4 gas delivered using a factory-certified MFC. Gas allowed to flow for 1 min.
Flow rate FT3 flow meter, Fox Thermal Instruments, Marina, CA
Alicat flow meters – 10, 100, and 500 slpm, Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
Multiple in-field point check: 5 lpm of CH4 gas delivered using a factory-certified MFC. Gas allowed to flow for 1 min.
HC leak rate BHFS, Bacharach Inc., New Kensington, PA
Multi-point pre- and post-study calibration checks using an Environics gas divider.
Zero/span calibration setting prior to daily field deployment.
HC concentration measurement from leaking component or at BHFS exhaust
FID TVA-1000B, Thermo Scientific Waltham, MA
Multi-point pre- and post-study calibration checks using an Environics gas divider.
Zero calibration setting prior to daily field deployment.
Cross-comparison to BHFS readings.
HC concentration measurement from leaking component or at BHFS exhaust
PPM Gas Surveyor 500, Gas Measurement Instruments Ltd, Renfrew, Scotland
Multi-point pre- and post-study calibration checks using an Environics gas divider.
Cross-comparison to BHFS readings.
HC concentration measurement from leaking component or at BHFS exhaust
DP-IR, Heath Consultants, Houston, TX
Multi-point pre- and post-study calibration checks using an Environics gas divider.
Cross-comparison to BHFS readings.
Optical capture and quantification of entire leak activity
OGI mid-wave IR camera, GF320, FLIR, North Billerica, MA
Visualizing emissions from the BHFS exhaust during the daily calibration procedure.
PC actuation counts
Model SERN-5 pneumatic counter, CEI, Wichita Falls, TX
Pre-deployment tests using a Mensor APC-600 (automated pressure calibrator).
Field check by manual actuation of a PC with counter attached.
5.2.1 Flow Meter Assessment
The Fox Thermal FT3 flow meter along with three Alicat flow meters (10, 100, and 500
slpm) will be used in the study to determine the leak flow rates from the PCs. All flow meters used
in this study will have received manufacturer’s calibration certification within 3 months prior to
conducting the study. Additionally, all flow meters will be checked by conducting pre-deployment
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 40 of 45
and daily flow checks. For the Fox Thermal FT3 flow meter and two of the Alicat flow meters
(100 and 500 slpm), 50 lpm of CH4 gas will be delivered using a factory-certified MFC. Gas will
be allowed to flow for 1 min. For the 10 slpm Alicat meter, 5 lpm of CH4 gas will be delivered
using a factory-certified MFC. Gas will be allowed to flow for 1 min. The flow rate observed
during these tests should be within 5% of the set flow rate.
Given a failure to meet this DQI, response actions will include, but are not limited to,
(1) performing manufacturer-recommended maintenance, and (2) seeking technical support from
the manufacturer.
5.2.2 Bacharach Hi Flow Sampler and QA Measuring Instrument Assessment
The BHFS will be used in this study with an augmented QA protocol to quantify emission
rates of continuously emitting pneumatic devices and any nearby fugitive emissions that might
affect flow meter–based PC emission measurements.
Proper operation of the BHFS will be assessed by conducting multi-point pre- and post-
study calibration checks using an Environics gas divider and by checking zero/span calibration
settings prior to daily field deployment. The BHFS response is calibrated at 2.5% and 100% CH4
before each day’s trials. The augmented QA protocol refers to secondary measurements of the
BHFS exhaust to confirm the leak rate (%) determinations are similar to those of Stovern et al.
(2016). The current choices for QA measuring systems are the TVA-1000B (Thermo Scientific
Waltham, MA), a PPM Gas Surveyor 500 (Gas Measurement Instruments Ltd, Renfrew, Scotland)
or a DP-IR, Heath Consultants, Houston, TX. The BHFS response will be tested by introducing
gas to the instrument inlet using an Environics gas divider in steps of 1 lpm from 1–10 lpm. The
BHFS responses will be recorded and are expected to be within 10% of the gas divider set value.
The QA measuring instrument will be tested by sampling at the exhaust of the BHFS for each of
10 set points on the gas divider. The recorded values are expected to be within 10% of the gas
divider set value. Table 5-3 shows example results of a multi-point check conducted on the BFHS
with the QA measuring instrument used at the exhaust.
Table 5-3. Sample BHFS Calibration Check Test
Environics Set Value (lpm)
BHFS (lpm)
Leak Rate (%) Measured by BHFS
Leak Rate (lpm) Measured by BHFS
Leak Rate (%) Measured by QA Instrument
1 201.4 0.54 1.1 0.45
2 202.1 1.07 2.1 1.00
3 202.2 1.52 3.1 1.5
4 202.1 1.83 3.9 1.9
5 203.0 2.62 5.3 2.3
6 202.8 2.92 6.0 3.1
7 203.4 3.65 7.3 3.6
8 203.5 4.13 8.4 4.0
9 203.4 4.62 9.4 5.0
10 203.6 5.06 10.3 5.5
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 41 of 45
5.2.3 Optical Gas Imaging (OGI) Camera Assessment
The OGI camera will be verified qualitatively by visualizing and recording the emissions
from the exhaust of the BHFS during the daily span procedures.
5.2.4 PC Actuation Counter Assessment
The PC actuation counters will be assessed by conducting pre-deployment tests using a
Mensor APC-600 automated pressure calibrator. Actuation counters are first evaluated to
determine actuation pressure by slowly increasing pressure until the device triggers. The actuation
counters are then subjected to a series of 10 pressure pulses greater than their actuation pressure.
Each pulse is followed by a complete depressurization of the actuation counter. The actuation
counters are considered acceptable if their actuation pressure is below 5 psig and they count all 10
pulsed actuation cycles.
The PC actuation counters will also be field verified by manual actuation of a PC with the
counter attached. This manual actuation will be carried out whenever possible and will be
conducted with the assistance of the on-site ORs.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 42 of 45
6.0 Data Reporting and Validation
6.1 Reporting Requirements
Reporting requirements for this project include the following:
PC, process, application, and classification information
Flow rates logged by the custom-designed flow meter data acquisition system
BHFS data records
Recorded data files from QA measurement instruments
OGI camera videos
PC actuation counts
6.2 Data-Related Deliverables
Jacobs personnel are ultimately responsible for all data acquisition deliverables for this
project. Some data and information will be developed by the EPA project team members and some
information will be provided by the participating ONG operators. Some information will be
developed by subcontractors to Jacobs. Jacobs is responsible for compiling, backing up, and
summarizing all project information including QA assessments for all information at all steps of
the process. Data-related deliverables include the following:
Documentation of safe operation procedures and site plan approvals
Acquisition of field data and information (Appendices A through E)
Backed up calibration data, field data, and QA information on a daily basis
Field notebook pages providing information on experimental setup and execution
Results of DQI assessments for precision and accuracy, as shown in Table 5-1
Data reduction and summaries
Table 6-1 lists the data-related deliverables, format of each deliverable, and personnel
responsible.
Table 6-1. Data-Related Deliverables
Deliverable Custodian Delivered to Format
PC, process, and site Information (Appendix A) Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR PDF of hard copy
Optical gas imaging videos (Appendix B) EPA R8* or Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR Video files
PC actuation counting data (Appendix C) Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR PDF of hard copy
Emission data by flow meter (Appendix D) Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR Data acquisition files
Emission data by augmented BHFS (Appendix E) Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR PDF of hard copy or logger files
Evacuated canister data (Appendix F) Subcontractor/Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR Excel and PDF files
Notebook page copies Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR PDF of hard copy
Results of DQI assessments Jacobs WAL EPA WACOR MS Word file
*EPA is responsible for acquiring data when an EPA OGI camera is used and for giving it to the Jacobs WAL for incorporation into the data set.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 43 of 45
6.3 Data Reduction Deliverables
Personnel from Jacobs are responsible for all data reduction activities for this project.
6.4 Data Validation Deliverables
Jacobs personnel are responsible for all data validation activities for this project. An
assessment of whether or not DQI goals were met will be performed and reported in a project
summary document.
6.5 Data Storage Requirements
Jacobs is responsible for recording and archiving the project data presented in Table 6-1.
At the end of each day that experiments are performed, the raw data files from the data
acquisition/control computer will be backed up using a standard USB thumb drive. Log sheets will
be copied, and two independent copies will be maintained. The data will be permanently backed
up to the EPA network upon return from the field. Jacobs field notebook entries will be scanned
to PDF files and saved to the EPA network after completion of the field experiments.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 44 of 45
7.0 References
Allen, David T., Vincent M. Torres, James Thomas, David W. Sullivan, Matthew Harrison, Al
Hendler, Scott C. Herndon, Charles E. Kolb, Matthew P. Fraser, A. Daniel Hill, Brian K. Lamb,
Jennifer Miskimins, Robert F. Sawyer, and John H. Seinfeld. (2013) “Measurements of
methane emissions at natural gas production sites in the United States.” Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 110(44): 17768–17773.
Allen, David T., Adam P. Pacsi, David W. Sullivan, Daniel Zavala-Araiza, Matthew Harrison,
Kindal Keen, Matthew P. Fraser, A. Daniel Hill, Robert F. Sawyer, and John H. Seinfeld.
(2014). “Methane emissions from process equipment at natural gas production sites in the
United States: Pneumatic controllers.” Environmental Science and Technology 49(1): 633–
640.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). (2010). ASTM D1945-03, “Standard Test
Method for Analysis of Natural Gas by Gas Chromatography” West Conshohocken, PA:
ASTM International. www.astm.org, (last accessed December 13, 2016). doi:10.1520/D1945-
03R10.
Howard, Touché. (2015a). “University of Texas study underestimates national methane emissions
at natural gas production sites due to instrument sensor failure.” Energy Science and
Engineering 3(5): 443–455.
Howard, Touche. (2015b). Comment on “Methane emissions from process equipment at natural
gas production sites in the United States: pneumatic controllers.” Environmental Science and
Technology 49(6): 3981–3982.
Howard, Touché, Thomas W. Ferrara, and Amy Townsend-Small. (2015). “Sensor transition
failure in the high flow sampler: implications for methane emission inventories of natural gas
infrastructure.” Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 65(7): 856–862.
Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association (OIPA). (2014). “Pneumatic Controller Emissions
from a Sample of 172 Production Facilities”, http://www.oipa.com/page_images/
1418911081.pdf, (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Prasino Group. (2013). “Determining Bleed Rates for Pneumatic Devices in British Columbia.”
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/climate-change/stakeholder-
support/reporting-regulation/pneumatic-devices/prasino_pneumatic_ghg_ef_final_report.pdf,
(last accessed December 13, 2016).
Simpson, David. (2014). “Pneumatic Controllers in Upstream Oil and Gas.” Oil and Gas Facilities
3(05): 83–96.
Stovern, Michael, Adam P. Eisele, and Eben D. Thoma. (2016). “Assessment of Pneumatic
Controller Emission Measurements Using a High Volume Sampler at Oil and Natural Gas
Production Pads in Utah.” Extended Abstract #92, Air and Waste Management Association
Air Quality Measurement Methods and Technology Conference, Chapel Hill, NC, March 15–
17.
Uinta Basin Well Pad
Pneumatic Controller Study QAPP-1J16-019.R1, Revision 1
December 9, 2016
Page 45 of 45
U.S. EPA. (1999). “Compendium Method TO-14A – Determination of Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOCs) in Ambient Air Using Specially Prepared Canisters with Subsequent
Analysis by Gas Chromatography.” https://www3.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/airtox/to-
14ar.pdf (last accessed December 13, 2016).
U.S. EPA. (2013). “EPA Method 18 – Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions
by Gas Chromatography using EPA ALT100” https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/approalt/
ALT100.pdf (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 1 of 9
Appendix A:
Pneumatic Controller and
Site Information-Gathering Procedures
Contract EP-C-15-008
December 2016
Prepared for
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 2 of 9
Contents
1.0 Scope and Applicability .............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 Summary of Method ................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 4
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings ........................................................................................................ 4
5.0 Personnel Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 4
6.0 Equipment and Supplies .............................................................................................................. 4
7.0 Forms ......................................................................................................................................... 5
8.0 Data and Records Management ................................................................................................... 5
9.0 References .................................................................................................................................. 5
Figures
Figure 7-1. Daily site information ............................................................................................................ 6
Figure 7-2. PC system OGI scan .............................................................................................................. 7
Figure 7-3. PC information form .............................................................................................................. 8
Figure 7-4. Form for recording test values ............................................................................................... 9
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 3 of 9
1.0 Scope and Applicability
1.1 This document describes the procedures for gathering pneumatic controller (PC) and site
information at each site during the 2016 Uintah Basin (UB) Regional Applied Research
Effort (RARE) field measurement activities.
1.2 This procedure applies to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and contractor
personnel performing screening activities for the 2016 UB RARE project and contains direction developed solely to provide internal guidance to UB RARE associated personnel.
2.0 Summary of Method
To achieve the primary and secondary objectives described in the Uintah Basin quality assurance
project plan (QAPP), the scientific approach for this study relies on information gathering of well pad pneumatic controller (PC) systems and their process-specific applications, with field
measurements of PC emissions and PC actuation data (where possible). This project will acquire
information of sufficient detail to allow later assignment of the PC systems encountered into the best available categorization schemes (e.g., American Petroleum Institute PC standards currently
under development). This project will use a simple, field survey–based PC system categorization
scheme based on the expected temporal characteristics of the emission profile, with the following
categories:
PCs that are not capable of emitting natural gas (NG) to the atmosphere
PCs that are not in operation due to seasonal or other reasons
Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate very infrequently (> every 1 day)
Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate infrequently (> every 15 min, but < 1 day)
Intermittent PCs that are expected to actuate frequently (< every 15 min)
Continuously emitting PCs
Malfunctioning PC or associated equipment or process
For the purposes of the UB RARE project, a FLIR GF320 infrared (IR) camera is used for three
main purposes. First, the IR camera is used to conduct a visual site survey to identify any potential
hazards to health and safety. Second, the IR camera is used to identify PCs that are emitting hydrocarbons and determine the frequency of actuation. Third, during the PC measurement phase,
the IR camera continuously monitors measurements being conducted at PCs to ensure complete
leak capture.
Using this PC-type classification framework, PC system, PC application, and well pad process
parameter data will be gathered using a system similar to (OIPA, 2014). Acquired information will
include well pad site details, PC manufacturer, model number, actuator information, tubing length,
and necessary PC-related process information. This basic PC system information will be augmented with other available information (e.g., date of installation, retrofit status, date of last maintenance)
if known by the ONG operator. This information-gathering activity will improve knowledge of the
types of PCs employed in the Uinta Basin (for the subset of well pad types surveyed). These data, for example, will provide activity factor (AF) information on the relative number of continuous and
intermittent actuating PCs of various types in use. This information will allow PC emissions
engineering calculations to be compared to PC emissions measurements. Additionally, this
information will allow understanding of the designed PC system emission profile so that deviations
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 4 of 9
from nominal (e.g., malfunctions) can be detected and the potential for in-field repairs assessed
(where possible).
3.0 Definitions
AF activity factor
IR infrared
NG natural gas
OGI optical gas imaging
ONG oil and natural gas
OR operator representative
PC pneumatic controller
QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan
RARE Regional Applied Research Effort
UB Uintah Basin
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings
4.1 All health and safety considerations outlined in the project health and safety plan must be
kept in mind when recording the specific parameters required in this procedure. It is the
responsibility of the user of this procedure to establish appropriate safety and health
practices.
4.2 Minimize exposure to potential health hazards by use of protective clothing, eyewear, and
gloves.
4.3 Always consult the ONG operator representative (OR) when gathering specific process
parameter data.
4.4 Ensure the process loop is de-energized for some measurements. This process will require
the assistance of the ONG OR.
5.0 Personnel Qualifications
5.1 UB RARE field personnel must only operate equipment for which they are trained and
authorized to use. Personnel must be trained by qualified operators.
5.2 UB RARE field personnel must be sufficiently trained to identify specific PC and process parameters.
6.0 Equipment and Supplies
Paper-based forms for noting PC system, PC application, and well pad process parameters
Infrared thermal imaging camera, FLIR model GF320 (FLIR Gas Detection Systems, Boston,
MA)
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 5 of 9
7.0 Forms
The form shown in Figure 7-1 is completed for each site visited. This form supplies information on the equipment and operations at the site, emission measurement instrument calibrations, safety
checks, and ambient temperature.
Figure 7-2 shows the form for recording data from the optical gas imaging (IR) camera. optical gas imaging (OGI) data are used to assess safety of operations in an area (measure levels of flammable
gas or explosion hazards), document PC operation (gas release), assess source(s) of natural gas
emissions (PC or nearby source), check IR camera readings against PC actuation counters and flow
measurement systems, and estimate PC gas emissions.
Figure 7-3 shows the form for recording the pneumatic controller specific information. This form
provides data for PC classification and for performing engineering calculations.
Figure 7-4 shows the form used for noting actual test values including the BHFS readings, flow meter readings, GMI readings, and temperature and pressure values.
8.0 Data and Records Management
Information generated or obtained by UB RARE field personnel is organized and accounted for in
accordance with established records management procedures. Jacobs will provide PDF copies of
all field-generated hard-copy forms to the EPA WACOR on a daily basis. Online versions of the
field-generated forms will then be filled out in Word or Excel format and copies will be retained by both the Jacobs work assignment leader and the EPA WA contracting officer’s representative.
The files are named using the following format: Date/Operator/Site/PC ID (YYMMDD/A/01/01)
9.0 References
Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association (OIPA). (2014). “Pneumatic Controller Emissions from a Sample of 172 Production Facilities”, http://www.oipa.com/page_images/
1418911081.pdf, (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 6 of 9
Figure 7-1. Daily site information
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 7 of 9
Figure 7-2. PC system OGI scan
Suvey scan of PCs *Reference Site Drawing File: pg. 1 of
ONG On-site Rep: Date/Arrival Time
Company ID (A-Z): Site ID (01-99):
PC ID*:
(01-99)OGI Scan
PC group
(a-h)Description
Measure Rank /
Notes
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 8 of 9
Figure 7-3. PC information form
Pneumatic Controller and Site Information Gathering
December 2016 Page 9 of 9
Figure 7-4. Form for recording test values
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 1 of 11
Appendix B:
Optical Gas Imaging Procedures
Contract EP-C-15-008
December 2016
Prepared for
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 2 of 11
Contents
1.0 Scope and Applicability .............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 Summary of Method ................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 3
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings ........................................................................................................ 3
5.0 Cautions ..................................................................................................................................... 4
6.0 Interferences ............................................................................................................................... 4
7.0 Personnel Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 4
8.0 Equipment and Supplies .............................................................................................................. 4
9.0 Procedure.................................................................................................................................... 5
10.0 Data and Records Management ................................................................................................. 10
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance ..................................................................................... 10
12.0 References and Supporting Documentation ............................................................................... 11
Figures
Figure 1. GF320 back of hand grip with Power, Menu Joystick, and Menu buttons. ................................. 6
Figure 2. GF320 top of hand grip with Auto/Manual/HSM, Focus/Zoom, and Save/Start-Stop Recording
buttons ................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Figure 3. GF320 top of camera with Programmable button, Temperature Range, and Camera Dial. .......... 7
Figure 4. GF320 front left side of camera with Manual Image Focus, Visible Image, and Laser buttons ... 8
Figure 5. GF320 back of camera with battery, battery release latch, battery compartment release, and
camera SD card and data storage. ............................................................................................................ 8
Tables
Table 1. GF320 Infrared Camera Buttons, Locations, and Functions ........................................................ 5
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 3 of 11
1.0 Scope and Applicability
1.1 The purpose of this procedure is to describe the use and operation of the FLIR GF320
infrared (IR) camera during the 2016 Uintah Basin (UB) Regional Applied Research Effort
(RARE) field measurement activities. The FLIR GF320 is used to locate leaks of hydrocarbon vapors from nearly all potential sources, such as pneumatic controllers (PCs),
valves, pumps, compressors, and tanks.
1.2 This procedure applies to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and contractor
personnel performing screening activities using the GF320 for the 2016 UB RARE project and contains direction developed solely for internal guidance to personnel associated with
the UB RARE project.
1.3 This procedure is a general guide. For more complete information on FLIR GF3xx series
IR camera functionality, please consult the manufacturer’s manual.
2.0 Summary of Method
The GF320 is designed to identify emissions of hydrocarbon gases using an IR detector. The
detector has been designed to capture IR radiation emitted within a narrow IR spectral range
corresponding to several hydrocarbon gases. The images of these hydrocarbon emissions, which appear as either black or white “smoke” depending on polarity settings and background, are
displayed in a viewfinder in real time. Lower emission detection limits can often be obtained using
the manual mode or high-sensitivity mode (HSM). The user should be familiar with these operating
modes prior to use in the field.
For the purposes of the UB RARE project, the GF320 capabilities are implemented for three main
purposes: (1) The IR camera is used to conduct a visual site survey to identify any potential hazards
to health and safety. (2) The IR camera is used to identify PCs that are emitting hydrocarbons and determine the frequency of actuation. (3) During the PC measurement phase, the IR camera
continuously monitors measurements being conducted at PCs to ensure complete leak capture.
This procedure was prepared by persons deemed technically competent by management based on
their knowledge, skills, and abilities. The procedure has been validated in practice and reviewed in print by a subject matter expert.
3.0 Definitions
EPA Environmental Protection Agency RARE Regional Applied Research Effort
HSM high-sensitivity mode SD secure digital
IR infrared UB Uinta Basin
PC pneumatic controller
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings
4.1 This document does not attempt to address all safety problems associated with the use of the IR camera. It is the responsibility of the user of this procedure to establish appropriate
safety and health practices.
4.2 Always observe proper safety procedures when using the IR camera. The operator must be
familiar with the safety aspects associated with the instrument’s operation, as outlined in the instrument’s operating manual.
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 4 of 11
4.3 The IR camera is not intrinsically safe and might require additional site-specific monitoring
prior to operation. Refer to any pertinent site-specific health and safety plans for guidelines on safety precautions. These guidelines, however, should only be used to complement the
judgment of an experienced professional.
4.4 Minimize exposure to potential health hazards by use of protective clothing, eyewear, and
gloves.
5.0 Cautions
5.1 If the camera is not working properly and a reboot of the camera does not alleviate the
problem, red-tag it and remove it from use.
5.2 Operate the camera only in appropriate environmental conditions. Temperatures above
50 °C (122 °F) can damage the camera.
5.3 Read the operational manual and fully understand all aspects of its use before attempting to operate the IR camera.
5.4 Avoid pointing the camera at strong energy sources, including the sun, as these could
negatively affect the detector.
6.0 Interferences
6.1 For accurate measurements, allow the camera a 5-minute warm-up period before use.
6.2 Avoid pointing the camera at strong energy sources, including the sun, as these could
negatively affect accuracy.
7.0 Personnel Qualifications
7.1 UB RARE field personnel must only operate equipment for which they are trained and
authorized to use. Personnel must be trained by qualified operators.
7.2 Operators of the instrument must read the manufacturer’s manual and this operating
procedure, and demonstrate that they fully understand how to properly operate the
instrument.
8.0 Equipment and Supplies
Infrared camera (FLIR Systems model GF320)
Infrared camera telephoto lens (FLIR Systems GF320 fixed lens; Standard 24° x 18°)
FLIR Systems user’s manual (FLIR GF3xx Series)
Spare rechargeable lithium-ion batteries
Laptop with secure digital (SD) storage
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 5 of 11
9.0 Procedure
9.1 Camera Startup
Table 1 provides a summary of IR camera operations. Users should refer to the GF320 IR camera
operator’s manual for additional information on keypad and button functions, level/gain control, and thermal image recording.
Table 1. GF320 Infrared Camera Buttons, Locations, and Functions
Button Location Function
S Top of hand grip Allows the user to save an image when in picture mode or start and stop the recording of video when in video mode.
A/M Top of hand grip Switches camera mode between Automatic -Level and Gain, Manual - Level and Gain, and High Sensitivity Mode (HSM).
FOCUS/ZOOM Top of hand grip Allows the user to focus the image when in video or picture mode and zoom in on an image that has been saved.
P Top of camera A programmable button that can be set to control the color palette, change zoom factor, invert polarity, or hide/show graphics.
Temperature Range Top of camera Allows the user to adjust the temperature range. Typical setting is 50–140 °F.
Menu Back of hand grip Allows the user to bring up the menu. Pressing menu a second time closes the menu or backtracks.
Menu Joystick Back of hand grip Allows the user to navigate menus. Pushing in selects menu option.
Power Back of hand grip Allows the user to turn the camera on and off.
Visible Image Front left side of camera Toggles the camera between visible imagery and IR imagery.
Laser Front left side of camera Allows the user to aim/identify. Holding down produces a laser dot for aiming/identifying.
Camera Dial Back left side of camera Used to switch between camera mode, video mode, file archive, program, and settings.
To operate the infrared camera:
1. Ensure that a fully charged battery has been inserted into the camera.
2. Turn the power on and allow 5 minutes for the camera to reach operating temperature. The message in the viewfinder will read “Cool down in progress” during this time.
3. After cool-down is complete, verify that the date and time settings are correct.
4. To set the date and time, turn the camera dial to settings, use the menu joystick to navigate to “set date and time,” and press joystick to change the date and time.
5. Remove the lens cap and select AUTO, MANUAL, or HSM mode by pressing the A/M button:
In AUTO mode, the camera sets the level and gain based on scene content, which can also
be described as the temperature of the objects in the scene.
In MANUAL mode, the user adjusts the level and gain manually to optimize the image in
the viewfinder. Adjusting level and gain is done by using the menu joystick (up/down
adjusts level; left/right adjusts gain).
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 6 of 11
In HSM mode, level and gain are set by the camera along with a higher image integration
rate to allow imaging of smaller leaks.
6. Adjust the focus using the FOCUS/ZOOM button (or the black ring near the lens) to produce
the clearest thermal image.
7. Ensure the camera is functioning properly (operation verification) by viewing the presence of a hydrocarbon plume through the eyepiece. This can be accomplished by the use of a butane
lighter or other hydrocarbon source. Document this verification in the field logbook.
The camera is now ready for thermal imaging.
Figures 1–5 show the control buttons for the Infrared Camera.
Figure 1. GF320 back of hand grip with Power, Menu Joystick, and Menu buttons.
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 7 of 11
Figure 2. GF320 top of hand grip with Auto/Manual/HSM, Focus/Zoom, and Save/Start-Stop Recording buttons.
Figure 3. GF320 top of camera with Programmable button, Temperature Range, and Camera Dial.
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 8 of 11
Figure 4. GF320 front left side of camera with Manual Image Focus, Visible Image, and Laser buttons.
Figure 5. GF320 back of camera with battery, battery release latch, battery compartment release, and camera SD card and data storage.
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 9 of 11
9.2 Safety Site Survey
1. Upon entrance to a project facility, use the GF320 to identify any substantial hydrocarbon vapor
plumes that might pose significant danger to health and safety by scanning the wellhead(s),
multiphase separator(s), storage tank vessel(s), and closed vent system from a distance of at least 20 meters.
2. Once the safety site survey is completed and no hazardous conditions are identified, enter the
required data on the form shown in Figure 7-1 in Appendix A of this QAPP and proceed to the
survey of facility operations.
3. Project personnel can approach the facility process units to conduct the PC emissions
identification procedure. No video recordings are necessary for the site safety survey
procedure, as the IR camera is only used in a safety screening capacity during this survey.
9.3 PC Emissions Identification
Upon completion of the safety site survey procedure, screen the facility for hydrocarbon emitting
PCs using the IR camera. Start the PC emissions identification at the wellhead and follow the
process stream all the way to the control device as follows:
1. At each process unit (i.e., wellhead, separator, and storage vessel), thoroughly inspect the entire
unit to identify all PCs.
2. When a PC is observed to be actuating (releasing hydrocarbon emissions), record a short (< 1 minute) video of the actuating PC. Record all associated data from this and subsequent steps
on the data-entry form (Figure 7-2 in Appendix A of this QAPP).
3. For each actuating PC, document the video file number, PC identifying information, and the type of emissions stream (i.e., intermittent or continuous) on the form shown in Figure 7-1 in
Appendix A.
4. Continue the identification process until the entire facility has been inspected with the camera and all actuating PCs have been documented.
5. Following identification of actuating PCs, a 10-minute continuous IR video will be recorded for each intermittent PC to determine actuation frequency. To monitor actuation frequency, set
up the IR camera on a tripod with an unobstructed view of the PC.
6. Document the video file number and specific PC identifying information in the field logbook for each actuation frequency monitoring video.
7. At the end of the workday, remove the video files from the IR camera SD card and store the
files on a secure data storage device (e.g., EPA laptop).
9.4 Measurement Leak Capture
During the PC measurement field campaign, the IR camera is used to verify leak capture of PC
emissions being directly sampled using the augmented Bacharach Hi Flow instrument as follows:
1. Set up the IR camera on a tripod with a clear line of sight to the PC measurement setup to identify any excess emissions not being collected by the Hi Flow sampler.
2. At the beginning of the Hi Flow sampling, record a video confirming leak capture to verify that all emissions from the PC are being collected by the Hi Flow sampler.
3. Document the video file number and specific PC identifying information in the field logbook.
4. At the completion of the workday, remove the video files from the IR camera SD card and
stores the files on a secure data storage device (e.g., EPA laptop).
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 10 of 11
9.5 Camera Battery Replacement
1. Open the battery compartment, located at the back of the camera by using the battery door release located just to the right of the battery compartment.
2. Press down on the battery release hatch (the small red lever located in the top right corner of
the battery compartment).
3. Remove the old battery.
4. Insert a new battery with contacts up, facing towards the camera body.
5. Close the battery compartment door.
10.0 Data and Records Management
Information generated or obtained by UB RARE field personnel must be organized and accounted
for in accordance with established records management procedures. Information concerning the field use of the IR cameras must be recorded in a bound logbook or equivalent electronic method,
as described in the procedure sections. Data recorded in the field project logbooks shall include,
but are not limited to, the following:
IR camera serial number
Project name
Facility name
Facility location
Camera operator name
Date and time
Recorded video file number
Description of recorded video
Weather conditions
Remarks
For each site visited, site description data are recorded on the form shown in Figure 7-1 of Appendix
A. For each PC for which emissions are monitored, the data are recorded on the form shown in
Figure 7-2 of Appendix A. These forms are scanned into electronic files at the end of each day’s
field work. Appendix A provides guidance on file names, organization and file storage, and backup.
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance
Important factors in establishing quality requirements include the sensitivity and specificity of the detection system used. Quality requirements include ensuring that equipment is ready for use as
follows:
Operating instructions and/or manuals from the manufacturer are available for each piece of
equipment.
Equipment used for field activities must be handled, transported, shipped, stored, and operated
in a manner that prevents damage and deterioration. Equipment must be handled, maintained,
and operated in accordance with the manufacturer’s operating instructions.
Optical Gas Imaging December 2016
Page 11 of 11
Field personnel are responsible for maintaining a central, comprehensive list of all field equipment subject to this procedure. The equipment inventory list for each instrument or piece of equipment
must include the following:
The description/identity of the equipment (e.g., IR camera, IR camera lens)
Manufacturer’s or vendor’s name
Equipment serial number or other manufacturer identification number
The manufacturer’s instructions or a reference to their location
Record of damage, malfunctions, modifications, and/or repairs to the equipment
Any problems or abnormalities observed during use of the instrument must be recorded in the field notebook. If the instrument does not appear to be operating properly, red-tag it and remove it from
service. Record pertinent information in the project logbook, including date, time, video file
number and description, location, and camera operator name.
Another quality check performed at each PC emissions test site is the qualitative correlation of IR camera readings (strength: 1, 2, or 3 [highest]; frequency: continuous or intermittent) with the more
sensitive hand-held probe measurements, as described in the main body of the QAPP, Section 4.1.5.
OGI scans are also correlated with actuation counter data, as described in QAPP Section 4.1.3. This correlation is done at each PC emission measurement site and is recorded in the field notebook.
12.0 References and Supporting Documentation
NEICPROC/11-005. FLIR GasFindIR GF320 Infrared Cameras. 1-23-2012.
FLIR GF3xx Series User’s Manual, Publ. No. T559157, Revision a506, December 21, 2010.
FLIR Systems, http://www.flir.com (last accessed December 13, 2016). Users can view training videos and download manuals from FLIR Systems.
Bacharach Inc., https://www.mybacharach.com/ (last accessed December 13, 2016).
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 1 of 8
Appendix C:
PC Actuation Counting Procedures
Using the SERN-5
Contract EP-C-15-008
December 2016
Prepared for
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 2 of 8
Contents
1.0 Scope and Applicability .............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 Summary of Method ................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 4
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings ........................................................................................................ 4
5.0 Cautions ..................................................................................................................................... 5
6.0 Interferences ............................................................................................................................... 5
7.0 Personnel Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 5
8.0 Equipment and Supplies .............................................................................................................. 5
9.0 Operation Procedures .................................................................................................................. 6
10.0 Data and Records Management ................................................................................................... 7
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance ....................................................................................... 7
Figures
Figure 1. Model SERN -5 pneumatic counter (not fully installed) ............................................................ 3
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 3 of 8
1.0 Scope and Applicability
1.1 The purpose of this procedure is to describe the installation, operation, and pre- and post-
deployment quality control checks for the model SERN-5 pneumatic counter from Control
Equipment Inc. (CEI; Wichita Falls, TX). The SERN-5 will be used on an experimental
(limited) basis to count actuation events from a subset of pneumatic controllers (PCs) as part of the Uinta Basin (UB) Well Pad Pneumatic Controller Emissions Research Study.
Note that other forms of PC actuation counting will be performed as part of the research
study (e.g., installed flow meter observations, discussed in Appendix D of the project quality assurance project plan [QAPP]) and are not described here.
1.2 This procedure applies to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and contractor
personnel performing screening activities using PC actuation counting for the 2016 UB
RARE project and contains direction developed solely to provide internal guidance to UB RARE associated personnel.
2.0 Summary of Method
The SERN-5 was originally developed for a specific oil field custody-transfer application and is
commonly called a “barrel counter.” It is a simple mechanical, diaphragm-based device that is
designed to count discrete gas pressure pulses in an approximate range of 5 psig to 30 psig. Each pressure pulse corresponds to one increment on the counter. The purpose of the device for this
project is to allow longer-term monitoring of intermittent PC actuation events. Figure 1 shows a
SERN-5 partially installed on the actuation side of a PC. The SERN-5 is easily reset to zero with a mechanical knob. Little information is available on the use of the SERN-5 for general well pad PC
actuation monitoring, but it is known to have limitations on certain types of PCs. This procedure is
intended as a general field guide and may be altered based on improved information on the use of
this device in initial field trials.
Figure 1. Model SERN-5 pneumatic counter (not fully installed)
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 4 of 8
As described in the QAPP for this effort, the main objective of this research study is the
measurement of natural gas (NG) emissions from well pad PCs. One form of measurement will be installed PC actuation counting described in this operating procedure. SERN-5 units are tested in
the EPA Metrology Laboratory before deployment to the field, installed in the field onto PC valves
to count the number of actuations (described in Section 9.0), and then tested again after the field study to ensure continuing operation.
3.0 Definitions
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HASP health and safety plan
IR infrared
Jacobs Jacobs Technology Inc.
NG natural gas
OGI optical gas imaging
ONG oil and natural gas
OR operator representative
PC pneumatic controller
psig pound(s) per square inch gauge
QA quality assurance
QAPP quality assurance project plan
UB Uinta Basin
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings
4.1 Please consult the operator-specific site health and safety plan (HASP) for further
information on safety procedures.
4.2 The procedures described here will only be conducted on PC systems on which the
procedures are judged to be safe and to have negligible process impact. The decision on
what PC systems are candidates for PC actuation counting is up to the oil and natural gas (ONG) operator representative (OR), a technical employee of the host site who will
accompany and assist the Jacobs Technology Inc. (Jacobs) team in safe execution of these
measurements.
4.3 Proper personal protective equipment (safety shoes, gloves, flame-resistant clothing) is
required.
4.4 Proper confirmation of leak-free connections is required.
4.5 Removal of ignition sources is required.
4.6 Personal safety monitors are required.
4.7 Proper safety equipment such as first aid kits and fire extinguisher must be carried.
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 5 of 8
5.0 Cautions
5.1 The OR is responsible for control loop shutdown and restart, as well as installation and
removal of the SERN-5.
5.2 A “hot work” permit is likely required for this activity.
6.0 Interferences
6.1 The counter has a maximum operating pressure of 30 psig. Exceeding 30 psig can
potentially rupture the internal diaphragm.
6.2 The counter is designed to work in snap applications where the valve actuator goes from
fully closed to fully open and then back to fully closed. If the counter in used in a throttle
application, a false reading will be recorded. The counter senses each time a pressure change is made to the actuator. In throttle mode, most controllers output changes slightly during
operation. A count might or might not be received each time the pressure changes in throttle
application. Hence these actuation counters are not recommended for throttle use.
7.0 Personnel Qualifications
7.1 The ONG OR must be qualified to assist in the installation of the SERN-5 and
knowledgeable of the well pad processes and PC types. The OR has safety responsibility
oversight for the effort and will make all final decisions with regard to potentially installed
flow meters and SERN-5 units. As an example, some PCs, such as safety devices, can trigger a well shut-in on loss of gas pressure (very high process impact), so these PCs
(usually very infrequently actuating) will not be assessed with installed flow meters or the
SERN-5. The OR must be knowledgeable of potential process impacts and safety considerations for control loop shutdowns.
7.2 Jacobs SERN-5 operators must have safety training and be trained and practiced in the use
of this equipment. The proper qualification of Jacobs personnel will be determined by the
Jacobs work assignment leader. Instrument operators must read the manufacturer’s manual and this operating procedure and demonstrate that they fully understand how to properly
conduct measurements, calibration procedures, and data recording/backup.
8.0 Equipment and Supplies
SERN-5 actuation counters
Installation fittings
Installation tools (might also be supplied by the OR)
Digital cameras to document installation
OGI camera for emissions and leaks diagnostics
TVA-1000B (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) hydrocarbon measurement instrument for
emissions and leaks diagnostics
Snoop liquid connect leak diagnostics
Safety equipment listed in operator/site specific HASP
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 6 of 8
9.0 Operation Procedures
9.1 PC Selection Procedures for Actuation Counting
A PC is a candidate for installation of the SERN-5 actuation counting device if it meets all the
following criteria:
9.1.1 Actuation counting provides value. Some PCs obviously frequently actuate and the
temporal profile of these PCs can be established with other observations or measurement procedures described in the project QAPP. Some PCs are known to be very infrequently
actuating (e.g., a safety shut-in device), and installation of a PC actuation counter for short-
duration (hours to days) observation provides no value. Some PCs actuate on time scales, such as fractions of an hour, hourly, or potentially several times a day, for which
observation and documentation of the events over hours or days would provide value to
the study. This type of PC is a potential candidate for actuation counting.
9.1.2 Some PCs are not candidates for actuation counting because installation of the actuation counter is very difficult or could cause serious process or safety issues. If the OR
determines a PC control loop can be shut down, the SERN-5 readily installed, and the PC
control loop restarted with little process impact or safety risk, this PC is a candidate for
actuation counting.
9.1.3 Some PCs are used in throttling or proportional applications or are continuously emitting
and the pressure change profile may not robustly trigger the SERN-5. These types of
applications are not good candidates for PC actuation counting. On the other hand, if a PC
application is of the on/off snap action variety (especially full-valve actuation), it could be a good candidate for actuation counting if other criteria are met.
9.1.4 The PC control loop operates in the 8–30 psig range.
9.1.5 The PC is operating normally (not malfunctioning).
9.2 Installation and Operation
9.2.1 Pre- and post-testing of the SERN-5 units will be conducted by the EPA Metrology
Laboratory to ensure that the devices are functional and able to count events and to
establish their approximate count pressure threshold.
9.2.2 In the field, a PC will be selected for monitoring with the SERN-5. Optical gas imaging (OGI) and other assessment procedures described in the project QAPP will be conducted
prior to installation of the SERN-5. This will be done to establish the operational state of
the PC system and its candidacy for actuation monitoring.
9.2.3 The following procedure will be used to count actuation events on selected PCs:
1. The site host (the ONG on-site OR) will de-energize and lock out the PC control loop,
making it safe to install the SERN-5.
2. The SERN-5 will be set to zero counts.
3. The OR will install the SERN-5 close to the actuator being monitored using a short nipple and a tee (ideally, directly attached to the actuator being monitored), as shown
in Figure 1. The counter should be positioned so it can be easily read.
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 7 of 8
4. The OR will complete the connection in the PC control loop and re-energize the supply
gas, making sure to set it at the proper pressure. The actuation counter will be observed during the control loop restart to see if a count is registered. If so, this count will be
removed from the final tally.
5. Leak detection procedures (OGI and Snoop leak detection solution) will be conducted to ensure proper installation.
6. A manual actuation of the PC will be attempted (if possible) to verify a single count.
If this is not possible, an attempt will be made to correlate a natural actuation (audible
or OGI signal) with an actuation count or other process information to confirm the counter is working. If this confirmation can be obtained, it will be recorded in the field
notebook. If the count cannot be confirmed, this will be noted. If the unit fails to
respond or registers multiple counts during the confirmation step, the unit will be removed and replaced after safe shutdown of the control loop by the OR. If it is deemed
that the PC is not suitable for actuation counting after the initial attempt, the counting
trial will be terminated and notes recorded in the field notebook.
7. After some agreed upon amount of time (hours to days), the actuation counts and total installation time will be recorded and the OR will prepare to remove the SERN-5. A
manual actuation may be attempted (or natural actuation observed) to ensure the device
is still counting prior to removal (notes recorded). As the control loop is de-energized, the actuation counter will be observed to see if a count is registered. This count will be
removed from the final tally.
8. The device will be safely removed (after de-energizing the control loop) and the PC system returned to the original state.
9. The SERN-5 counter will be tested by the EPA Metrology Laboratory after its return
from the field. A counter can be used in multiple trials.
10.0 Data and Records Management
All counts recorded by the actuation counters will be manually noted in the field notebook on an hourly, daily, or weekly basis depending on the length of the observation period for which the
actuation counter is installed in the process loop. How long an actuation counter will be installed
in any process loop will be determined after consulting the ONG OR.
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance
1.1 Field personnel are responsible for maintaining a central, comprehensive list of all field
equipment subject to this procedure. The equipment inventory list for each instrument or piece of equipment must include the following:
Description/identity of the equipment (e.g., infrared [IR] camera, IR camera lens).
Manufacturer or vendor name.
Equipment’s serial number or other manufacturer identification number.
The manufacturer’s instructions or a reference to their location.
Record of damage, malfunction, modification, and/or repair of the equipment.
PC Actuation Counting Using the SERN-5
December 2016 Page 8 of 8
11.2 Any problems or abnormalities observed during use of the instrument must be recorded in
the field notebook. If the instrument does not appear to be operating properly, red-tag it
and remove it from service. Record pertinent information in the project logbook, including date; time; video file number, description, and location; and camera operator name.
11.3 The pre- and post-field deployment testing done in the EPA Metrology Laboratory
constitute one type of QA check. The Metrology Laboratory tests on each SERN-5 ensure
that the devices are functional, able to count events (pulsed 10 times), and establish their approximate count pressure threshold. These data are recorded in Metrology Laboratory
records and associated with each SERN-5 through its serial number. These data are also
entered into the project electronic files for easy reference in the field.
11.4 A second type of QA check is the qualitative correlation of OGI scans with PC valve
actuations. This information is recorded in the field notebook.
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 1 of 9
Appendix D:
Operating Procedures for
Flow Meter Measurements
Contract EP-C-15-008
December 2016
Prepared for
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 2 of 9
Contents
1.0 Scope and Applicability .............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 Summary of Method ................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 3
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings ........................................................................................................ 4
5.0 Cautions ..................................................................................................................................... 4
6.0 Interferences ............................................................................................................................... 4
7.0 Personnel Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 5
8.0 Equipment and Supplies .............................................................................................................. 5
9.0 Operation Procedures .................................................................................................................. 6
10.0 Data and Records Management ................................................................................................... 7
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance ....................................................................................... 8
12.0 References and Supporting Documentation ................................................................................. 9
Tables
Table 1. Major Equipment Used for This Procedure ................................................................................. 6
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 3 of 9
1.0 Scope and Applicability
1.1 The purpose of this procedure is to describe the installation, operation, daily calibration,
and data backup procedures for installed flow meter measurements as part of the Uinta
Basin Well Pad Pneumatic Controller Emissions Research Study.
1.2 This procedure is intended as a general field guide. For additional information on the
operation of the flow meters and mass flow controllers (MFCs) described here, please
consult the product manuals.
2.0 Summary of Method
As described in the quality assurance project plan (QAPP) for this effort, measurements of natural gas (NG) emissions from pneumatic controllers (PCs) is the subject of the study. One form of
measurement will be installed flow meters described in this operating procedure. The following
summarizes the procedure:
Daily calibration tests will be conducted on the flow meters at the start of each field
measurement day. The daily calibration test procedure is described in sections 9.1 and 9.2.
To conduct the installed flow meter measurement on a selected and approved PC, the OR will
shut down the PC control loop (shut off/depressurize) and will disconnect a mutually agreed
upon tubing connection (typically a 0.5-in. Swagelok fitting).
The Jacobs meter run will then be installed.
The control loop will be repressurized to the previous setting. Jacobs and the OR will verify
and record the integrity of the connections and the process settings (primarily supply pressure).
Jacobs will then conduct the flow measurement (typically 15 minutes in duration) and log the
data in the field notebook. The OR will then shut down the control loop, remove the meter runs,
and bring the system back to normal operation.
3.0 Definitions
DAS data acquisition system
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
HASP health and safety plan
Hz hertz
in. inch(es)
IR infrared
Jacobs Jacobs Technology, Inc.
lpm liter(s) per minute
min minute(s)
ms millisecond(s)
NG natural gas
ONG oil and natural gas
OGI optical gas imaging
OR operator representative
PC pneumatic controller
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 4 of 9
QAPP quality assurance project plan
slpm standard liter(s) per minute
TVA Toxic Vapor Analyzer
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings
4.1 Please consult the operator-specific site health and safety plan (HASP) for further
information on safety procedures.
4.2 The procedures described here will only be conducted on PC systems on which the
procedures are judged to be safe and to have negligible process impact. The decision on
what PC systems are candidates for installed flow meter measurements is up to the oil and natural gas (ONG) operator representative (OR), a technical employee of the host site who
will accompany and assist the Jacobs Technology Inc. (Jacobs) team in safe execution of
these measurements.
4.3 This procedure uses compressed gas cylinders containing 100% methane gas. Proper
personal protective equipment (e.g., safety shoes, gloves) and lift procedures are required
when handling compressed gas cylinders.
4.4 Proper procedures for handling and venting flammable gases are required.
4.5 Proper confirmation of leak-free connections is required.
4.6 Removal of ignition sources is required.
4.7 Personal safety monitors are required.
4.8 Proper grounding of equipment is required.
4.9 Proper safety equipment such as first aid kits and fire extinguisher must be carried.
5.0 Cautions
5.1 Operate field equipment only in appropriate environmental conditions (temperature ranges
indicated in the manuals). This equipment cannot be operated in the rain. Use a sun shield
to keep direct sunlight off the equipment when possible in hot temperatures.
5.2 Daily calibration checks (described in sections 9.1 and 9.2) are required to ensure that the meters have not been damaged or internally corrupted through use in upstream ONG
environments without pre-filters. Failure of daily calibration checks necessitates corrective
action.
6.0 Interferences
6.1 The accuracy of installed flow meter measurements is affected by the operational range of
the meter. The proper meter range must be used for all measurements. If is determined
during a real-time observation of the measurement that a different meter range is required,
the OR will be notified and the new meter will be installed according to standard installation procedures.
6.2 The accuracy of installed flow meter measurements is affected by variations in NG
composition. Best available information on gas composition must be obtained.
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 5 of 9
6.3 The accuracy of installed flow meter measurements is affected by connection leaks. The
installed meter run must be verified to be leak-free using Snoop liquid.
6.4 The interpretation of the installed flow meter measurements is affected by the degree to
which a positive attribution to the PC actuation can be obtained. Secondary fugitive leaks
(not part of the meter run) or other issues such as gaskets or diaphragm leaks on the valve
actuator will be recorded by some configurations of the installed flow meters. These emissions must be separately identified to the extent possible.
7.0 Personnel Qualifications
7.1 The ONG OR must be qualified to assist with installation of the installed flow meters and
knowledgeable of the well pad processes and PC types. The OR has safety responsibility oversight for the effort and makes all final decisions with regard to potential installed flow
meter measurements. As an example, some PCs, such as safety devices, can trigger a well
shut-in on loss of gas pressure (very high process impact), so these PCs (usually very
infrequently actuating) will not be assessed with installed flow meters. The OR must be knowledgeable of potential process impacts and safety considerations for control loop
shutdowns.
7.2 Jacobs flow meter operators must have safety training and be trained and practiced in the
use of this equipment. The proper qualification of Jacobs personnel will be determined by the Jacobs work assignment leader. Instrument operators must read the manufacturer’s
manual and this operating procedure and demonstrate that they fully understand how to
properly conduct measurements, calibration procedures, and data recording/backup.
8.0 Equipment and Supplies
Flow meters and data acquisition system
Class 1 Div 2 cabling
Flow meter calibration check system
Calibration gases and two-stage regulators
Meter runs, connection tubing, spare fittings
Power supply
Field tables to support meters
Laptop computer and data storage media
Digital cameras to document measurement configurations
OGI camera for emissions and leak diagnostics
TVA hydrocarbon monitor for emissions and leak diagnostics
Snoop liquid connect leak diagnostics
Safety equipment listed in operator/site-specific HASP
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 6 of 9
Table 1. Major Equipment Used for This Procedure
Device Manufacturer Model Range / Description
Calibration system mass flow controller
Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MCR-100S Lpm-D-485-MODBUS-X / 5M, 5IN
0.5–100 slpm
Flow meter 1 Fox Thermal Instruments, Marina, CA
FT3 INLINE-0uP-SS-ST-E1-D0-MB-G3-G3,
0–24 (nom.) – 47 slpm
0–47 (nom.) – 235 slpm
Flow meter 2 Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-500S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X/5M
2.5–500 slpm
Flow meter 3 Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-100S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X/5M
0.5–100 slpm
Flow meter 4 Alicat Scientific, Inc., Tucson, AZ
MW-10S Lpm-D-DB9M-MODBUS-485-X
0.05–10 slpm
Data acquisition system for recording data
Techstar Inc., Deer Park, TX
Four-channel C1D2 DAQ for installed flow meters
1 Hz start/stop data acquisition panel
9.0 Operation Procedures
9.1 Daily Calibration Procedure Setup
Daily calibrations will be performed prior to making flow measurements on the gas valves. There
is concern that the mass flow meters might be damaged by particulate or heavy organic matter
present in the gas stream used to control the valves. A calibration check will ensure the meter was not damaged during previous measurements. The 10 lpm mass flow meter will be checked
separately from the other larger mass flow meters. The three larger mass flow meters will be setup
in series and the mass flow controller will be connected upstream of the three large controllers. A cylinder of pure methane will be used as the check gas.
9.2 Daily Calibration Check Operation
9.2.1 To check the calibration of the three large mass flow meters, the mass flow controller will
be set to deliver 50 lpm of methane gas. The gas will be allowed to flow for 1 min. For a
valid check, the gas flow measurements from the mass flow meters should be within 5%
of the expected flowrate or ± 2.5 lpm.
9.2.2 To check the calibration of the 10 lpm mass flow meter, the mass flow controller will be set to deliver 5 lpm of methane gas. The gas will be allowed to flow for 1 min. For a valid
check, the gas flow measurements from the mass flow meter should be within 5% of the
expected flowrate or ± 0.25 lpm.
9.2.3 If time permits, the FLIR and OGI systems can be spot-checked during the calibration checks for the flow meters. These checks are recorded in the field notebook.
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 7 of 9
9.3 PC Measurement Setup
After the mass flow meters have been plumbed to the PC gas valve to be tested, the meters will be
wired to the data acquisition system (DAS). The data acquisition system has been designed to log
the flows for the four mass flow meters. Data from the DAS will be downloaded and backed up using a standard USB thumb drive. The internal clock on the DAS will be checked daily and
adjusted to within 5 seconds of the local cell phone service time.
9.4 PC Measurement Operation
The DAS for the mass flow meters is operated through a Yokogawa (Sugarland, TX) Smartdac+
GP 20 portable paperless recorder. The mass flow meter DAS can log data at 100 ms or 10 Hz.
This is a standalone DAS with an internal memory unit to store the data. The data collection is started using a touchscreen start/stop key on the DAS.
10.0 Data and Records Management
Data from the mass flow meter calibrations will be logged in a laboratory notebook. The DAS system has internal memory for storing the flow rates from the mass flow meters. This data will be
transferred using a USB thumb drive to the field team leader’s computer at the end of the workday.
Data reduction is accomplished using the spreadsheets shown in Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1. Example Alicat viscosity correction spreadsheet
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 8 of 9
Figure 2. Example actuator vent calculator spreadsheet
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance
11.1 The sensitivity and specificity of the detection system are important factors in establishing
quality requirements. Quality requirements include ensuring that equipment is ready for use as follows:
Operating instructions and/or manuals from the manufacturer are available for each
piece of equipment.
Equipment used for field activities is handled, transported, shipped, stored, and
operated in a manner that prevents damage and deterioration. Equipment must be handled, maintained, and operated in accordance with the manufacturer’s operating
instructions.
11.2 Field personnel are responsible for maintaining a central, comprehensive list of all field
equipment subject to this procedure. The equipment inventory list for each instrument or piece of equipment must include the following:
Description/identity of the equipment (e.g., Fox Thermal FT3, Alicat 10 lpm).
Manufacturer or vendor name.
Equipment’s serial number or other manufacturer identification number.
The manufacturer’s instructions or a reference to their location.
Record of damages, malfunctions, modifications, and/or repairs to the equipment.
Flow Meter Measurements December 2016
Page 9 of 9
11.3 During field operations, the main QC checks are the calibration checks performed prior to
daily use of the flow meters, described in Section 9.2. All flow meters are checked at several flow rates, using mass flow controllers, in the RTP Metrology Laboratory prior to
and after field deployment. These data are associated with flow meter serial numbers as
part of the project records.
11.4 Any problems or abnormalities observed during use of the instrument must be recorded in
the field notebook. If the instrument does not appear to be operating properly, red-tag it
and remove it from service. Record pertinent information in the project logbook.
12.0 References and Supporting Documentation
Alicat Scientific, http://www.alicat.com/products/mass-flow-meters-and-controllers/low-pressure-drop-mass-flow-meters-controllers/ (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Fox Thermal, https://foxthermalinstruments.com/products/ft3.php (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Yokogawa GP20, https://www.yokogawa.com/us/solutions/products-platforms/data-acquisition/
portable-data-acquisition/ (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 1 of 14
Appendix E:
Operating Procedure for Augmented
Bacharach Hi Flow Sampler Measurements
Contract EP-C-15-008
December 2016
Prepared for
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 2 of 14
Contents
1.0 Scope and Applicability .............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 Summary of Method ................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 3
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings ........................................................................................................ 4
5.0 Cautions ..................................................................................................................................... 5
6.0 Interferences ............................................................................................................................... 5
7.0 Personnel Qualifications ............................................................................................................. 6
8.0 Equipment and Supplies .............................................................................................................. 6
9.0 Instrument Setup Procedure ........................................................................................................ 8
10.0 Data and Records Management ................................................................................................. 12
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance ..................................................................................... 12
12.0 References and Supporting Documentation ............................................................................... 13
Figures
Figure 1. BHFS ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2. BHFS sampling attachments ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 3. BHFS Control Unit with pushbutton options ............................................................................. 8
Figure 4. BHFS top panel and connections............................................................................................... 9
Tables
Table 1. BHFS Control Unit Buttons........................................................................................................ 8
Table 2. Expanded Mode Main Options ................................................................................................. 10
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 3 of 14
1.0 Scope and Applicability
1.1 The purpose of this procedure is to describe the use and operation of the augmented
Bacharach Hi Flow® sampler (BHFS) during the 2016 Uinta Basin (UB) Regional Applied
Research Effort (RARE) field measurement activities. The instrument is used to determine
the rate of gas leakage around various components of oil and natural gas (ONG) facilities, and will be applied to measure emissions from natural gas (NG)–driven pneumatic
controllers (PCs) at selected well pad operations.
1.2 This procedure applies to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and contractor
personnel performing screening activities using the augmented BHFS for the 2016 UB RARE project and contains direction developed solely to provide internal guidance to UB
RARE associated personnel.
1.3 This procedure is a general guide. For more complete information on the BHFS
functionality and maintenance, please consult the manufacturer’s manual.
2.0 Summary of Method
2.1 The BHFS is designed to use a high flow rate, of up to 10.5 standard cubic feet per minute
(scfm) at full battery charge, to capture both the gas leaking from a component and a
portion of the surrounding air to determine the component’s leak rate.
2.2 The main unit of the instrument, which consists of a high-flow blower and gas manifold,
is packaged inside a backpack and is controlled by a hand-held control unit (CU), which is attached to the main unit with a 6-foot coiled cord. A gas sample is drawn into the main
unit using a flexible 1.5-inch hose and various attachments for complete capture. The
sample is passed through an orifice restrictor to measure pressure differential and calculate sample flow rate. A portion of the sample is directed to a combustibles sensor channel to
measure methane (CH4) concentration, while a second combustibles sensor channel
measures background CH4 away from the leak. A second blower exhausts the gas sample
to the atmosphere.
2.3 Calculation of the gas leak rate is achieved from accurate flow rate measurement, sample
stream CH4 concentration, and background CH4 concentration, with all values displayed
on the CU.
2.4 For the purposes of the UB RARE project, the BHFS capabilities will be implemented to measure the rate of gas emissions from continuously emitting PCs. The BHFS will measure
all combustible compounds in the sample stream, but as the instrument is calibrated for
CH4, the measured emissions rate will deviate from the actual emissions rate due to internal
sensor response and flow rate effects. In addition, the BHFS capabilities will be used to measure any fugitive emissions in the vicinity of a PC.
3.0 Definitions
BHFS Bacharach Hi Flow® sampler
cfm cubic feet per minute
CH4 methane
CU control unit
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 4 of 14
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
HASP health and safety plan
ID identification
in. inch(es)
lpm liter(s) per minute
NiMh nickel metal hydride
NG natural gas
ONG oil and natural gas
PC pneumatic controller
ppm part(s) per million
QA quality assurance
QC quality control
RARE Regional Applied Research Effort
scfm standard cubic feet per minute
UB Uinta Basin
4.0 Health and Safety Warnings
4.1 This document does not attempt to address all the safety issues associated with the use of
the BHFS. It is the responsibility of the user of this procedure to establish appropriate safety and health practices.
4.2 Always observe proper safety procedures when using the BHFS. The operator must be
familiar with the safety aspects associated with the instrument's operation, as outlined in
the instrument’s operating manual.
4.3 The BHFS is designed to be intrinsically safe for use in hazardous locations Class I,
Division 1, Groups A, B, C, and D, in North America.
4.4 The instrument is packaged inside a backpack, leaving the user’s hands free for additional
safety. The unit also has two magnets and a neck strap accessory to facilitate viewing of
the CU while in operation.
4.5 The BHFS is not to be used in any application that is beyond its intended purpose or beyond
the scope of its specifications. It is not for use as a safety device for the personal protection
of the user. Failure to follow this warning can result in personal injury or damage to the
equipment.
4.6 The BHFS must be grounded while conducting a leak test. Failure to ground the unit
introduces the possibility of a static discharge.
4.7 The BHFS was developed for use on NG streams with high CH4 content. Additional
precautions and considerations might be required when using the instrument in NG streams
of mixed composition, as these locations might contain lower CH4 percentages in the overall mixture.
4.8 The instrument uses an intrinsically safe nickel metal hydride (NiMh) rechargeable battery
pack. Connecting or disconnecting the battery back in an unsafe atmosphere presents an
explosion hazard and must not be performed.
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 5 of 14
4.9 Refer to any pertinent site-specific health and safety plan (HASP) for guidelines on safety
precautions. These guidelines, however, should only be used to complement the judgment
of an experienced professional.
4.10 Minimize exposure to potential health hazards by use of protective clothing, eyewear, and
gloves.
5.0 Cautions
5.1 Read the operational manuals and fully understand all aspects before attempting to operate
the instrument.
5.2 Operate field equipment only in appropriate environmental conditions. This instrument
should be operated between 0 and 50 °C (32 and 122 °F) and stored between –40 and 60 °C
(–40 and 140 °F). Temperatures above 60 °C (140 °F) can damage the instrument.
5.3 Avoid sampling leaded gasoline vapors or gases or vapors that contain silicones or sulfur
compounds. Tetraethyl lead, silicones, and sulfur compounds can form contaminating compounds on the sensor element (poison the sensor), with resulting loss in sensitivity.
5.4 Always purge the instrument with clean air after testing to remove combustibles from the
sensor chambers. Purging the instrument prolongs sensor life.
5.5 Removing the instrument cover can result in electrostatic discharge and destroy sensitive electronic components. Prior to removing the cover, connect to a reliable ground point
using a wrist strap, ground all equipment with ground straps, and handle components on a
grounded anti-static work surface. Do not wear clothing that generates static electricity
during movement or handle static-generating objects. Maintain the work area humidity between 40% and 50%.
6.0 Interferences
6.1 The BHFS was developed for use on NG streams with high CH4 content. Use of a response
correction factor is recommended when sampling at alternate locations where less CH4 as a percentage of the overall mixture is present.
6.2 Calibrate the instrument every 30 days, or more frequently depending on use or the amount
of gas sampled, to ensure its accuracy.
6.3 Turn the instrument on in clean air. Turning the instrument on in air contaminated with
combustible gas will cause false readings to occur.
6.4 The instrument does not measure absolute pressure and therefore does not compensate for
the effects of altitude.
6.5 Choose an attachment that will ensure the complete capture of the gas leak.
6.6 Attachments can have the effect of concentrating the leak. Ensure that enough air is present
when first sampling to support catalytic mode (from 0 to 5% CH4 concentration by volume) of the instrument. Flooding the sensor with high concentrations of CH4 at startup can result
in erroneously low readings and prevent transition to thermal conductivity mode.
6.7 For either the Manual Two-Stage Mode or the Automatic Two-Stage Mode, a test is only
considered valid when the difference between measurements 1 and 2 is < 10%.
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 6 of 14
7.0 Personnel Qualifications
7.1 UB RARE field personnel must only operate equipment for which they are trained and
authorized to perform. Personnel must be trained by qualified operators.
7.2 Operators of the instrument must read the manufacturer’s manual and this operating
procedure and demonstrate that they fully understand how to properly operate the
instrument.
7.3 Personnel should have sufficient background in physical science and understand the
hazards associated with NG.
8.0 Equipment and Supplies
BHFS unit (see illustrations of this instrument and associated equipment in Figures 1 and 2)
Backpack
6-foot, 1.5-inch hose assembly
2 NiMh rechargeable battery packs
Battery charger with power supply
Control unit with LCD and four-button keypad
Flange strap attachments (34, 80, and 137 in.)
Capture bag attachment (36 x 36 in.)
Beveled nozzle attachments (6.5 and 24 in.)
Bag nozzle
Bellows tool
Claw tool
2.5% CH4 in air, P/N 0051-1121
100% CH4, P/N00 55-0060
Figures 1 and 2 show the BHFS unit and associated sampling attachments.
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 7 of 14
Figure 1. BHFS
Figure 2. BHFS sampling attachments
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 8 of 14
9.0 Instrument Setup Procedure
9.1 Instrument Calibration
The instrument is calibrated daily prior to the collection of any gas leak measurements. The BHFS
CU buttons (Table 1 and Figure 3) are used during the calibration process.
Table 1. BHFS Control Unit Buttons
Button Function
I/O ↵ The Enter button turns the instrument on or selects highlighted display option
∧ The Up Arrow button scrolls up through display options
∨ The Down Arrow button scrolls down through display options
ESC The Escape button cancels warm-up, leak rate test, or calibration, or exits to previous display
Figure 3. BHFS Control Unit with pushbutton options
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 9 of 14
9.1.1 Check Calibration
A calibration check is run prior to calibration because the calibration check requires less time and less gas compared to a complete calibration run. Section 11.2 describes additional quality assurance
(QA)/quality control (QC) procedures followed during the study.
1. Ensure that the calibration equipment in not connected to the Gas or Background inlet port and that the instrument is located in a clear air environment.
2. Turn the instrument on and wait for the warm-up period to complete.
3. Connect the 2.5% CH4 cylinder from the calibration equipment to the Background inlet port.
4. Select “Menu” from the main screen followed by “Calibration,” and then “Verify Calibration” to begin the calibration verification process. The gas-sampling pump motors will start. After
several minutes, the display will indicate a stabilized “Back %” concentration that should match
the calibration gas cylinder value. (The BHFS has a built-in calibration check. The instrument displays the result of the calibration check by indicating whether the check is within limits. If
the system calibration is not within the acceptable range of the instrument, the calibration
process is repeated.)
5. Disconnect the hose from the Background inlet port and connect it to the Gas inlet port. After several minutes, the display will indicate a stabilized “Leak %” concentration that should match
the calibration gas cylinder value.
6. Disconnect the hose from the Gas port, and allow the pumps to run until both the Back and Leak readings display zero percent.
7. Press the ESC key three times to return to the main screen. If gas is still present in either sensor
chamber when ESC is pressed, the instrument will automatically begin to purge the sensors until all gas is removed from the instrument. Figure 4 shows the top of the BHFS unit with the
various gas inlets.
Figure 4. BHFS top panel and connections
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 10 of 14
9.1.2 Gas Calibration
1. Ensure that the calibration equipment in not connected to the Gas or Background inlet port and that the instrument is located in a clean air environment.
2. Turn the instrument on and wait for the warm-up period to complete.
3. Select “Menu” from the main screen, followed by “Calibration,” and then “Calibrate Sensors” to display the Sensor Calibration screen.
4. Highlight the sensor to be calibrated along with its gas level using the Arrow (∧∨) keys.
5. Connect the appropriate calibration gas to the instrument’s Gas or Background inlet port. Press
the I/O (↵) key to start the calibration process. The gas-sampling pump motors will start and the Calibration screen will appear.
6. Adjust the “Appl(%)” reading, if necessary, using the ∧∨ keys to match the calibration gas
cylinder value.
7. After the gas reading stabilizes, press the I/O ↵ key to calibrate the actual gas reading to the applied reading. The message “Calibration Passed!” will be displayed to indicate successful
calibration.
8. Disconnect the hose from the Gas or Background port, and wait until the measured gas reading falls to zero percent.
9. Press the ESC key to return to the Calibration Menu screen.
10. Repeat this procedure as necessary to calibrate both sensors at 2.5% and 100% CH4 (two different gas cylinders).
9.2 Instrument Startup
Users should refer to the BHFS operator’s manual for additional information on CU buttons,
functions, and options and how to properly connect attachments. The operator’s manual contains
additional information on submenu options available by selecting the Menu option in either Basic mode or Expanded mode (see Table 2).
Table 2. Expanded Mode Main Options
Option Function
Date and Time Date (mm/dd/yy) and time (12-hour format) display
Btry(V) Battery voltage
#1-#2(%) The difference (%) between the first and second test measurements
Flow(lpm) Sample flow rate in liters per minute (lpm) or cubic feet per minute (cfm)
Back(%) Measured background level in parts per million (ppm) or percent by volume
Leak(%) Measured gas leak concentration at current sample flow rate in parts per million (ppm) or percent-by-volume
Leak(lpm) Calculated leak rate in liters per minute (lpm) or cubic feet per minute (cfm)
Speed(Lo|Hi) Blower speed indicator
Save Save all current measurement parameters
Start/Stop Start and stop a test
Continued on next page
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 11 of 14
Option Function
Menu Display the first of several submenus
Battery status
[0001] Current test identification (ID) number
(A) or (M) Automatic or Manual mode
S or --1 or --2 Standby, Measurement #1 (maximum flow rate), or Measurement #2 (reduced flow rate)
Message Line Displays various status or error messages during operation
Calibration Allows the user to perform, view, or erase calibration verification, dates, and values
Set Flow Units Set flow rate display in liters per minute (lpm) or cubic feet per minute (cfm)
Select Language Set display language to English or Russian
Menu Mode Set display to Basic Mode or Expanded Mode
Operating Mode Set operating mode to Automatic Mode or Manual Mode
Access Records Send, view, or erase saved records
Access Test IDs Create, edit, send, or erase Test IDs
The following steps are used for operation of the BHFS:
1. Ensure that the instrument is located in an area containing clean air and is free of combustible
gases or vapors.
2. Turn the power on by flipping the On/Off switch. An initial banner screen is displayed for
3 seconds that displays the instrument name, software version, and software create time. After
3 seconds, the sensors will automatically zero to ambient conditions.
3. After calibration, either the Basic Mode or Expanded Mode main screen is displayed. Select the Expanded Mode by selecting “Menu” and then “Menu Mode.” Highlight “Expanded Menu”
and press the I/O ↵ button. Press ESC to return to the main screen.
4. Ensure operating units are in cubic feet per minute. Select “Set Flow Units” and highlight “cfm
(cu.ft./min.)”. Press the I/O ↵ button. Press ESC to return to the main screen.
5. Ensure the instrument is operating in Manual 1-Stage Mode. Select “Operating Mode” and
highlight “Manual 1-Stage”. Press the I/O ↵ button. Press ESC to return to the main screen.
“(M)” is now displayed at the bottom of the screen.
6. Create a Test ID by selecting “Access Test IDs” and highlighting “Edit Test IDs.” Select the
last Test ID number that can be displayed. The next number after the displayed number will be
the next test ID. Use the ∧/∨ and I/O ↵ keys to select and enter the desired Test ID. After all
characters are selected, press and hold the I/O ↵ button to move the cursor to the end of the
screen. When the “Edit Test IDs” display appears, press ESC twice to return to the main screen.
9.3 Leak Rate Measurements
1. Ensure that the instrument is operating in Manual 1-Stage Mode.
2. Select an attachment that will completely capture the chosen gas leak. Connect the attachment to the end of the main sampling hose. When attaching the flange strap or capture bag, a click
will be heard when the main sampling hose has been successfully connected.
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 12 of 14
3. When using the capture bag attachment, use the draw strings to partially close the end of the
bag, allowing air to replace the volume of gas and air removed during the test.
4. Place the background gas sampling hose inlet opposite the leak source to prevent leaks from
contributing to background measurement.
5. Select “Start” from the main screen to initiate sampling.
6. The message “Access new test ID” is displayed to prompt the selection of a new or different Test ID. Select “No” to return the display to the main screen and begin measurement with the
current Test ID. To select an alternate Test ID, select “Yes” to define a Test ID with the Access
Records menu.
7. Begin measuring until a stable leak measurement (leak rate that does not vary over 10 seconds
of measurement time) is achieved. If desired, use the “Speed” function to manually control the
flow rate by pressing the I/O ↵ key to lower the flow rate. Adjustments to the flow rate are indicated by the speed bar moving to the left.
8. Select “Stop” to complete the measurement.
10.0 Data and Records Management
Information generated or obtained by UB RARE field personnel must be organized and accounted
for in accordance with records management procedures. Information concerning the field use of
the BHFS must be recorded in a bound logbook or equivalent electronic method, as described in the procedure sections. Data recorded in the field project logbooks shall include, but are not limited
to, the following:
BHFS serial number
Project name
Facility name
Facility location
BHFS operator name
Measurement date and time
Recorded Test ID
Attachment used
Measured leak concentration and calculated leak rate
Weather conditions
Remarks
11.0 Quality Control and Quality Assurance
11.1 General Quality Considerations
11.1.1 Sensitivity and specificity of the detection system are important factors in establishing
quality requirements. Quality requirements must include ensuring that equipment is ready
for use as follows:
Operating instructions and/or manuals from the manufacturer are available for each
piece of equipment.
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 13 of 14
Equipment used for field activities is handled, transported, shipped, stored, and
operated in a manner that prevents damage and deterioration. Equipment must be
handled, maintained, and operated in accordance with the manufacturer's operating instructions.
The instrument must be calibrated daily, prior to collecting measurements, to ensure
consistency and comparison of data across multiple sites.
11.1.2 Field personnel are responsible for maintaining a central, comprehensive list of all field
equipment subject to this procedure. The equipment inventory list for each instrument or piece of equipment must include the following:
Description/identity of the equipment (Bacharach Hi Flow® sampler, attachments
used, etc.).
Manufacturer or vendor name.
Equipment’s serial number or other manufacturer ID number.
The manufacturer's instructions or a reference to their location.
Record of damages, malfunctions, modifications, and/or repairs to the equipment.
11.1.3 Any problems or abnormalities observed during use of the instrument must be recorded in
the field notebook. If the instrument does not appear to be operating properly, red-tag it and remove it from service. Record pertinent information in the project logbook, including
date, time, test ID, location, and instrument operator name.
11.2 Specific Quality Checks
11.2.1 The correct operation of the BHFS will be assessed by conducting pre- and post-study
multi-point calibration checks using an Environics gas divider in steps of 1 lpm from 1 lpm
to 10 lpm, with acceptable responses within 10% of the gas divider set value. Zero/span calibration settings will also be checked prior to daily field deployment. The BHFS
response is calibrated at 2.5% and 100% CH4 before each day’s trials (described in Section
9.1).
11.2.2 Due to recent discussions regarding the validity of BHFS measurements (Howard et al.,
2015), the use of a QA measurement device at the exhaust of the BHFS will be an essential
component of this study. The augmented QA protocol refers to secondary measurements
of the BHFS exhaust to confirm the leak rate (%) determinations are similar to those of Stovern et al. (2016). The current choices for QA measuring systems are the TVA-1000B
(Thermo Scientific Waltham, MA, USA) for the low end and either a PPM Gas Surveyor
500 (Gas Measurement Instruments Ltd, Renfrew, Scotland) or a Detecto Pak-Infrared
(DP-IR Heath Consultants, Houston, TX, USA) for higher concentrations.
12.0 References and Supporting Documentation
Bacharach Inc., https://www.mybacharach.com/ (last accessed December 13, 2016).
Bacharach HI FLOW® Sampler for Natural Gas Leak Rate Measurement Instruction 0055-9017 Operation and Maintenance Manual, Revision 7, July 2015
Augmented BHFS Measurements
December 2016 Page 14 of 14
Howard, Touché. (2015a). “University of Texas study underestimates national methane emissions
at natural gas production sites due to instrument sensor failure.” Energy Science and
Engineering 3(5): 443–455.
Howard, Touche. (2015b). Comment on “Methane emissions from process equipment at natural
gas production sites in the United States: pneumatic controllers.” Environmental Science and
Technology 49(6): 3981–3982.
Howard, Touché, Thomas W. Ferrara, and Amy Townsend-Small. (2015). “Sensor transition
failure in the high flow sampler: implications for methane emission inventories of natural gas
infrastructure.” Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 65(7): 856–862.
Stovern, Michael, Adam P. Eisele, and Eben D. Thoma. (2016). “Assessment of Pneumatic
Controller Emission Measurements Using a High Volume Sampler at Oil and Natural Gas
Production Pads in Utah.” Extended Abstract #92, Air and Waste Management Association Air
Quality Measurement Methods and Technology Conference, Chapel Hill, NC, March 15–17.
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 1 of 22
Appendix F:
Evacuated Canister Analysis Procedures
Prepared for
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared by
Enthalpy Analytical, Inc.
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 2 of 22
Appendix Fa:
GC/FID Analysis of Hydrocarbons
Using Method TO-14A
SOP-ENT 115 Rev. 2.0
Prepared by Enthalpy Analytical, Inc.
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 3 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 4 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 5 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 6 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 7 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 8 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 9 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 10 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 11 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 12 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 13 of 22
Appendix Fb:
EPA Method 18 Bag and
EPA ALT-100 Canister Analysis
SOP-ENT 150 Rev. 7.0
Prepared by Enthalpy Analytical, Inc.
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 14 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 15 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 16 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 17 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 18 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 19 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 20 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 21 of 22
Canister Sampling and Analysis
December 2016
Page 22 of 22